On Aug 2, 2008, at 13:40, David E. Wheeler wrote:
2. Not capabale of being manipulated by an external program - "Only
perl can
understand Perl, etc.".
It looks like M::B does not current put the keywords into the
META.yml file when you run `make distmeta`. It ought to.
Actua
On Aug 3, 2008, at 05:19, Shlomi Fish wrote:
Hmmm... that's interesting. Sounds useful. Is it supported in
search.cpan.org/kobesearch yet? Of course, I'd also like to have
Freshmeat-like categories:
http://freshmeat.net/browse/18/
You would need to get them into the META spec, I think.
Becau
On Aug 2, 2008, at 07:17, Shlomi Fish wrote:
http://xrl.us/bi6n9 (link to svn.berlios.de) is a functional spec
for a way to
tag and classify CPAN modules. Those tags and catgories should end
up in the
META.yml. However, inserting them by hand by editing the Build.PL
will be:
You are aware
On Aug 4, 2008, at 04:14, Shlomi Fish wrote:
Um, nothing has to parse Build.PL.
Parse and modify Build.PL
I agree with you: nothing should do that.
So you agree that I should not edit META.yml directly?
Yes.
In this case I want
something machine-readable as input to M::B, which will ev
On Apr 1, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
> Yes, I was envisaging something like gitPAN. Though if this took off
> then moving the tarball->git import logic to the PAUSE server would
> probably be a good idea.
/me stashes these ideas away for PGAN…
Hi All,
Ovid and I were getting fed up with the horrible DFA::Simple module, so
I wrote a new module, DFA::StateMachine, to take its place in our work.
But I'm no computer scientist, so I'm not even sure whether the name is
right or if the module functions the way a DFA state machine is
sup
On Dec 15, 2004, at 6:34 AM, Orton, Yves wrote:
As far as I know a DFA is defined as a finite automaton where each
state/input combination can result in only one legal transition.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_state_machine) An NFA of course
can
have multiple transitions for a given state/i
On Dec 15, 2004, at 7:04 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:
There's a Computer::Theory::FSA module already:
http://search.cpan.org/~frighetti/Computer-Theory-FSA-0.1_05/lib/
Computer/Theory/FSA.pm
but it doesn't look pleasant to use.
That was the problem with DFA::Simple, as well. Not simple.
FSA::Rules seems o
First off, thanks for the great discussion, everyone. It's so nice to
get feedback on a module!
On Dec 15, 2004, at 2:08 AM, Orton, Yves wrote:
/pedant mode:
What Ovid said.
Maybe: FSA::Rules is better?
I like that pretty well. Nice and short.
Having said that it looks like an interesting module.
On Dec 15, 2004, at 11:00 AM, David Coppit wrote:
Yes, but not in the traditional sense. Traditionally, you can only
have 1
transition from a state for a given input. i.e. the model all by itself
defines a deterministic behavior. What you actually have is
model+algorithm defining a deterministic b
On Dec 15, 2004, at 12:43 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
D'oh! I've already renamed it DFA::Rules in Subversion. Ah, well, at
least it's easy to change. Look for the new module to be on CPAN later
today.
And here it is:
The following report has been written by the PAUSE namespace
On Dec 15, 2004, at 12:00 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"- get_next_state() returns a new DFA object, which
is in the next state. If there is no next state, it
returns undef."
What's that from?
In version 2 I'll make the states objects. But this will do for now. :-)
Regards,
David
On Dec 15, 2004, at 3:56 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
It seems to me that your code could be used to implement either
a DFA or an NFA, so you might want to call it it an FSM.
Algorithm::FSM, perhaps? Or maybe Decision::FSM??
I went with FSM::Rules. I think it's a good name, and falls in line, I
think,
On Dec 15, 2004, at 10:01 AM, Orton, Yves wrote:
IMO yes. However its also similar to the type of production system
described
by Church. (hefty IIRC on that :-)
So long as there can only be one legal transition for a given
configuration
of the machine then its a DFA.
So maybe it should be DFA::R
On Dec 15, 2004, at 9:42 AM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
- Then define check() to be { self->attempt_transition() || croak
... }
But a better name than check() would also be good.
Ah, I guess you like the idea of attempt_transition() returning undef
on failure but not die'ing, eh? I gu
On Dec 15, 2004, at 12:02 PM, Ken Williams wrote:
It short-circuits and there's no backtracking? That's odd. Seems
like that should be stated in the docs somewhere, since that's how
most people expect an FSA to work.
I'm expanding the docs now, even as I incorporate people's suggestions.
In any
On Dec 16, 2004, at 4:16 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In version 2 I'll make the states objects. But this
will do for now. :-)
I mean making the whole "DFA" an object.
Once you can return a whole DFA, you could easily
explore states and do backtracking in a higher level
of abstraction.
Yes, I had t
17 matches
Mail list logo
