# New Ticket Created by "Sean O'Rourke"
# Please include the string: [perl #17070]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17070 >
Perl arrays allow accesses to negative out-of-bounds indices without
complaining or
>Ok then, [perl #16934] is unvalid, it should be removed from rt unless
>we want its syntax as an alternative to the correct way.
The removal process looks like:
set patch status to "Rejected" (and make sure to send an email
with a reason)
Change ticket state to resolved.
-R
> Damian Conway wrote:
> >>And is the is/but distinction still around?
> >
> >Oh, yes.
>
> Could someone please reference where this decision was
> made. I do not find any information describing the distinction.
The following May 2001 post was related. Poke around the
thread it was in, especial
Damian Conway wrote:
>>And is the is/but distinction still around?
>
>Oh, yes.
Could someone please reference where this decision was made. I do not find
any information describing the distinction.
Steve
_
Join the worlds larges
On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Jeff wrote:
> In attempting to figure out why tests in languages/perl6 aren't running,
> I came across something of an oddity in t/harness.
>
> > my @tests = @ARGV ? @ARGV : map { glob( "t/$_/*.t" ) } ( qw(compiler rx) );
>
> Apparently designed to loop through just compiler/
--
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:26:08
Damian Conway wrote:
>Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
>
>
>> Is it just me or is the 'is' property syntax a little
>> too intuitive? Seems like everywhere I turn, the
>> proposed syntax to solve a problem is to apply a
>> property.
>
>That's because most of th
Sean O'Rourke wrote:
>
> On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Jeff wrote:
--snip--
> What this code is trying to say is "don't run the parser tests, because
> they're unmaintained". So probably something like
>
> grep !m{t/parser/} glob "t/*/*.t"
>
> would suck less. Maybe with a note about why it's
reposted because my mailer is evil
--
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:31:45
Damian Conway wrote:
>Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
>
>> I know that the property syntax is pseudo established,
>> but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the
>> built in properties were building. What about good ol'
On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Mr. Nobody wrote:
> While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
> syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
> as this one to match a C float
>
> /^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
>
> would act
--
On Thu, 05 Sep 2002 09:31:45
Damian Conway wrote:
>Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
>
>> I know that the property syntax is pseudo established,
>> but I'm beggining to become a bit jaded about all the
>> built in properties were building. What about good ol'
>> aliases?
>>
>> sub hidden (s
On Sat, Sep 07, 2002 at 09:03:43AM -0700, Mr. Nobody wrote:
> While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
> syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
> as this one to match a C float
Wrong list. You want the second door down the h
Mr. Nobody wrote:
> /^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
>
> would actually become longer:
>
> /^(<[+-]>?)\d*(\.\d*)?(<[Ee]>(<[+-]>?\d+))?$/
Your first expression uses capturing parens, but the captures
don't bind anything useful, so you should probably compare
non-capturing versi
On 6 Sep 2002 at 11:15, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> I've been told that my patch #16937 (which changes ld_shared from the
> hard-wired wrong value of -shared to $Config{lddlflags}, which is the
> variable designed in perl5 for this precise use) breaks cygwin. But in
> the current state of affairs, w
Erik Steven Harrison:
# But still, what counts as a runtime property, other than true or
# false, as in the delightful '0 but true'? What other kind of runtime
# labels can I slap on a value?
These occur to me:
$foo=0 but string("zero");
$bar='foobar' but num(1);
$baz=1
In attempting to figure out why tests in languages/perl6 aren't running,
I came across something of an oddity in t/harness.
> my @tests = @ARGV ? @ARGV : map { glob( "t/$_/*.t" ) } ( qw(compiler rx) );
Apparently designed to loop through just compiler/ and rx/ directories,
yet there are also bui
While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
as this one to match a C float
/^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
would actually become longer:
/^(<[+-]>?)\d*(\.\d*)?(<[Ee]>(
On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 09:24:47PM +, Jason Gloudon wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Jason Gloudon
> # Please include the string: [perl #16308]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16308 >
>
>
>
> This a
Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>
> > Ok, with the alignment hack now in (see resources.c) and lots of various
> > and sundry portability fixes, it looks like we're on our way to turning
> > the tinderbox a lovely shade of green.
>
> AARGH! It appears I spok
On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Chuck Kulchar wrote:
> Also, how do these perl6 builtins in perl6 work with the current
> P6C/Builtins.pm? (also, why are some that are already defined in pure
> pasm/part of the parrot core redefined as perl6 code?)
For the moment, "they don't". Eventually, I expect there w
On Fri, 6 Sep 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 1:39 PM +0200 9/6/02, Josef Hook wrote:
> >On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> >> At 1:40 PM +0100 9/5/02, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> >> >I believe applying the patch is the right thing, because it's progress
> >> >on where we are, but I th
>> # INTERNAL q, qq, qw
>> # XXX - how do I do quote-like operators? I know I saw someone say...
>> # Need to do: qr (NEVER("qr")) and qx
>presumably the way the perl5 tokeniser does them - by parsing the string
>into a series of concatenated constants and variables, with some optionally
>fed thr
While Apocolypse 5 raises some good points about problems with the old regex
syntax, its new syntax is actually worse than in perl 5. Most regexes, such
as this one to match a C float
/^([+-]?)(?=\d|\.\d)\d*(\.\d*)?([Ee]([+-]?\d+))?$/
would actually become longer:
/^(<[+-]>?)\d*(\.\d*)?(<[Ee]>(
Apologies for trying to resuscitate this old horse, but a new idea
occurred to me.
Back in October I suggested that $a ^+= @b would act like reduce,
but in discussion
it was decided that it would act like length, by the interpretation:
$a ^+= @b
$a = $a ^+ @b
$a = ($a, $a, $a, ..
On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 11:27:59PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
>
> Answering to the best of my knowledge.
>
> On Sat, 7 Sep 2002, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>
> > Question #2:
> >
> > Why are we storing the hypothetical's sigil in the match object?
>
> I think it's to differentiate the differen
On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 07:37:48PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 09:32:27PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, with the alignment hack now in (see resources.c) and lots of various
> > > and sundry portability fixes, it loo
# New Ticket Created by Peter Gibbs
# Please include the string: [perl #17067]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=17067 >
Mike's changes to integrate the external and selfpoolptr flags
have resulted in the on_f
Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 09:01:13PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
>>#17026 was reverted by committing minor print changes.
> It has been reverted, but not in the way you describe:
Ah, thanks for doing the research work.
> I would prefer not to be the committer to f
27 matches
Mail list logo
