I would argue that eval BLOCK and eval STRING are closer than indicated
by Mr. Schwern. In either case, you supply an argument which contains
code, and that code is executed. As a small amount of protection
from this dynamic element, fatal errors within the eval()ed code
are trapped and prevente
Dave Mitchell wrote:
> some sort of clone method
With tree strings, at clone time they get reorged into minimal number
of nodes: back to one big block if they are all the same type, or
back to one block for each type transition if it is tagged data.
Having the basic string type support arbi
>
> Now look at eval. When acting on a string, it compiles and runs it as
> code. When acting on a block, it traps any errors and prevents dying.
> You may be able to come up with some weak analogies between the two,
> but they're two different functionalities.
i have nothing to add. you o
> >> Taiwanese read traditional chinese characters, but PRC people read
> > >> simplied chinese. Even we take the same data, and same program
(code),
> > >> people just read differently. As an end user, I want to make the
decision.
> > >> It will drive me crazy if Perl render/display the text fil
At 05:16 PM 6/20/2001 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote:
>Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Taiwanese read traditional chinese characters, but PRC people read
> >> simplied chinese. Even we take the same data, and same program (code),
> >> people just read differently. As an end user,
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 09:18:14PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> But I'm digressing. What I want to talk about is overloaded builtins.
>
> I recently suggested that C be overloaded to make its argument,
> when its argument is not a filehandle, become read-only. An objection
> was made to this,
At 10:31 AM 6/20/2001 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
> > The one problem with copy-on-write is that, if we implement it in
>software,
> > we end up paying the price to check it on every string write. (No free
> > depending on the hardware, alas)
> >
> > Not that this should shoot down the idea of COW s
> The one problem with copy-on-write is that, if we implement it in
software,
> we end up paying the price to check it on every string write. (No free
> depending on the hardware, alas)
>
> Not that this should shoot down the idea of COW strings, but it is a cost
> that needs considering. (I
Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Taiwanese read traditional chinese characters, but PRC people read
>> simplied chinese. Even we take the same data, and same program (code),
>> people just read differently. As an end user, I want to make the decision.
>> It will drive me crazy if P
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 05:43 PM 6/19/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> > set $B to copy-on-write mode, so future changes to $B do not
> > affect $A
>
> The one problem with copy-on-write is that, if we implement it in software,
> we end up paying the price to che
At 05:43 PM 6/19/2001 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> set $B to copy-on-write mode, so future changes to $B do not
> affect $A
The one problem with copy-on-write is that, if we implement it in software,
we end up paying the price to check it on every string write. (No free
depending on
At 03:17 PM 6/20/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:53:28 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
>
> >> * Do a substr operation by character and glyph
> >
> >The byte based is more useful. I have utf-8, and I want to substr it
> >to another utf-8. It is painful to convert it or linear search
At 04:23 PM 6/19/2001 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
>This is the common approach of complicated text representation,
>the implemetations I have seen includes IBM IText and SGI
>rope. For "rope", each rope is represented by either of a simple
>immutable string, a simple mutable string, a simple immutab
On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 11:53:28 -0700, Hong Zhang wrote:
>> * Do a substr operation by character and glyph
>
>The byte based is more useful. I have utf-8, and I want to substr it
>to another utf-8. It is painful to convert it or linear search for
>charaacter
>position.
I tend to agree.
I currently
14 matches
Mail list logo
