St�phane writes:
> Hyper operators with operands of different size are partly covered
> in A3:
>
> Hyper operators will also intuit where a dimension is missing from one
> of its arguments, and replicate a scalar value to a list value in that
> dimension. That means you can say:
> @a ^+ 1
>
> The former example a particular case of the size an operand being a
> multiple of the other:
>
> my @a = 6; # <= still supported in perl 6?
This assigns the single element 6 to @a. Yes, it's still supported.
But perhaps you were intending:
my @a; $#a = 5;
which, in Perl 6, would be:
my @a is dim(6);
> @a ^= ( 1, 2, 3);
>
> could be equivalent to
>
> my @a = ( 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3)
But not necessarily. Could also be equivalent to:
> @a = ( 1, 2, 3, @a[3], @a[4], @a[5])
See below.
> We could even extend to operands where none size is a multiple of the
> other but I can't see any reason to do that. Also I can't see what
> happens when we deal with multidimension arrays. I don't know/remember
> if perl6 will make the distinction between jagged multidimensional
> arrays (� la C and perl5) and rectangular ones
>
> So my question is: where do we stop? What happen if we can't carry
> an hyperator?
Hyperoperators will raise their lower-dimensioned operand to the
dimension of their higher-dimensioned operand, by replicating the
lower-dimensional operand "perpendicularly to itself" (as it were).
So:
(1,2,3) ^+ 1
becomes:
(1,2,3) ^+ (1,1,1)
and:
([1,2],[3,4]) ^+ (1,2)
becomes:
([1,2],[3,4]) ^+ ([1,2],[1,2])
etc.
To deal with length mismatches within the same dimension, hyperoperators
will pad values (usually the operation's identity value) as necessary.
So:
(1,2,3,4) ^+ (5,6)
becomes:
(1,2,3,4) ^+ (5,6,0,0)
whilst:
(1,2,3,4) ^* (5,6)
becomes:
(1,2,3,4) ^* (5,6,1,1)
Padding with the identity value is why the earlier assignment example
was padded with @a's existing elements.
> Really hyper-operator is too long :)
> How do you say "mot valise" in English to denote this conflation of words,
> I think Lewis Caroll had a word for that.
As Dan suggested, "portmanteau word" is the English equivalent.
Though "hyper-operator" is not -- technically -- such a thing. It's
merely a prefixed word. We *could* coin the portmanteau word "hoperators"
though, if you'd prefer. Verry hupper-clawss, owd bean!
;-)
Damian
