At 8:22 AM +1100 11/18/02, Damian Conway wrote:
Luke Palmer asked:
Of course, there will be a pragma or something to instruct it to
operate serially, yes?
I doubt it. Unless there's a pragma to instruct threads to operate
serially.
In any case, I'm not sure what such a pragma would buy you. T
At 1:00 PM +1100 11/18/02, Iain 'Spoon' Truskett wrote:
* Dan Sugalski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [18 Nov 2002 12:56]:
[...]
Perl's standard threading behaviour's going to be
rather heavyweight, though.
Silly question time: Why is it going to be rather heavyweight?
(Not complaining or berating, jus
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 08:13:58PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:51:05 -0800
> > From: Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Therefore, in base 1, you can only use the digit 0. (Actually, I
> > think base 1 is a corner case--you only get one digit, but that digit
> > is
> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:51:05 -0800
> From: Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Therefore, in base 1, you can only use the digit 0. (Actually, I
> think base 1 is a corner case--you only get one digit, but that digit
> is 1, so you can represent any number N by making N tally marks.)
Well, if
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 03:01:08PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 15 Nov 2002 at 12:02, Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> > A couple more corner cases:
> >
> > $a = 1:0; #error? or zero
>
> Shouldn't base-1 be:
>
> 1:0 == 10:0
> 1:1 == 10:1
> 1:11 == 10:2
> 1:111 == 10:3
> 1:1010111 == 10:5
> etc..
Nope
* Dan Sugalski ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [18 Nov 2002 12:56]:
[...]
> Perl's standard threading behaviour's going to be
> rather heavyweight, though.
Silly question time: Why is it going to be rather heavyweight?
(Not complaining or berating, just wanting information =) )
> (Though the presentation on
At 7:39 AM +1100 11/18/02, Damian Conway wrote:
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Creates a disjunction of three classnames, then calls the C<.run>
method on each, in parallel, and returns a disjunction of the results
of the calls (which, in the void context is ignored, or maybe
optimized away).
I was afr
Luke Palmer enquired:
we still have implicit iteration:
for fibs() {
print "Now $_ rabbits\n";
}
Really? What if fibs() is a coroutine that returns lists (Fibonacci
lists, no less), and you just want to iterate over one of them? The
syntax:
for &fibs {
print "
> > My favorite was from ages ago:
> >
> > sub bar(;$foo //= $_) {...}
>
> I think that today that would be written more like this:
>
> sub bar(;$foo) is given($def_foo) {
> $foo = $def_foo unless exists $foo;
> ...
> }
>
> Though we might get away wi
On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 14:08, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> > For example:
> >
> > my $x = 18;
> > my $y = -18;
>
> my $z = -256:234.254; # negative number
> my $e = 256:-234.254; # error
Why?
--
Brya
On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 14:53, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> >> So, can we specify floats in other bases?
> >
> > Why would you want to?
>
> Personally I wouldn't. That doesn't mean it's not useful to someone.
FWIW, I occasionally work with floating point in base-2 and base-16.
Not that that should, b
On 15 Nov 2002 at 12:02, Dave Whipp wrote:
> A couple more corner cases:
>
> $a = 1:0; #error? or zero
Shouldn't base-1 be:
1:0 == 10:0
1:1 == 10:1
1:11 == 10:2
1:111 == 10:3
1:1010111 == 10:5
etc..
Also 0:0 == 10:0
--
Markus Laire 'malaire' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 09:28:59 +1100
> From: Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've a couple of questions here:
> we still have implicit iteration:
>
> for fibs() {
> print "Now $_ rabbits\n";
> }
Really? What if fibs() is a coroutine that returns lists (Fibonacci
lists,
Of course, apart from the "call-with-new-args" behaviour, having
Pythonic coroutines isn't noticably less powerful. Given:
sub fibs ($a = 0 is copy, $b = 1 is copy) {
loop {
yield $b;
($a, $b) = ($b, $a+b);
}
}
we still have implicit iteration:
Angel Faus wrote:
I understand that this formulation is more powefull, but one thing I like
about python's way (where a coroutine is just a funny way to generate lazy
arrays) is that it lets you _use_ coroutines without even knowing what they
are about.
Such as when you say:
for $graph.nodes {
Luke Palmer asked:
Of course, there will be a pragma or something to instruct it to
operate serially, yes?
I doubt it. Unless there's a pragma to instruct threads to operate
serially.
In any case, I'm not sure what such a pragma would buy you. The
ordering of evaluation would still be inherent
> Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 07:39:55 +1100
> From: Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> It would be *vastly* better thought integrate junctive calls with
> the standard threading behaviour.
Of course, there will be a pragma or something to instruct it to
operate serially, yes?
Luke
Adam D. Lopresto wrote:
It seems like that would be useful and common enough to write as
sub bar(;$foo is given) {
...
}
Where $foo would then take on the caller's topic unless it was explicitly
passed an argument.
While I can certainly see the utility of that, I believe it is too c
Dan Sugalski wrote:
Creates a disjunction of three classnames, then calls the C<.run>
method on each, in parallel, and returns a disjunction of the results
>> of the calls (which, in the void context is ignored, or maybe
>> optimized away).
I was afraid you'd say that.
Then you shouldn't ha
here is ( a liitle bit ) poished version of
http://archive.develooper.com/perl6-language%40perl.org/msg12393.html
just if somebody want to use it .
I left some of the comments by Damian Conway because when I tryed to (
thought of ) saying it myself , it lost clarity/brevity/intensity .
But
=-
=section assignment vs binding
=-
* A = B ;
"assign" means :
evaluate the *value* on the right hand side and
*distribute* it ( value ) among the containers ( which if
Dave Storrs writes:
>
> Good point. I volunteered to be keeper of the glossary a while ago,
> but I never actively started creating one. That said, let's make this
> the first entry. Comments and constructive criticisms welcomed from
> all comers.
>
I tryed to "cut in stone" ( but this
chromatic writes:
>I've submitted three bugs for Perl 6 to [EMAIL PROTECTED] They're in
>RT, but they haven't been announced on this group. I believe Allison
>has asked Ask to look into this.
Well, since I'm the RT owner, you and she should have asked me, or
even better, the bugs6-admin at perl.
At 12:46 PM +1100 11/17/02, Damian Conway wrote:
Dan Sugalski pondered:
What does:
>
$foo = any(Bar::new, Baz::new, Xyzzy::new);
$foo.run;
do?
Creates a disjunction of three classnames, then calls the C<.run> method on
each, in parallel, and returns a disjunction of the results of
Dave Storrs wrote:
[...] Just as an aside, this gives me an idea: would it be
feasible to allow the base to be specified as an expression instead of
a constant? (I'm pretty sure it would be useful.) For example:
4294967296:1.2.3.4 # working with a really big base, hard to grok
2**32:1.2.3
At 1:29 PM +1100 11/17/02, Damian Conway wrote:
The formulation of coroutines I favour doesn't work like that.
Every time you call a suspended coroutine it resumes from immediately
after the previous C than suspended it. *And* that C
returns the new argument list with which it was resumed.
Hrm.
Damian Conway wrote:
>
> The formulation of coroutines I favour doesn't work like that.
>
> Every time you call a suspended coroutine it resumes from immediately
> after the previous C than suspended it. *And* that C
> returns the new argument list with which it was resumed.
>
> So you can write th
Greetings all,
Allison has asked me to be the coordinator to make sure that we all
send in our Contributor License Forms. You can read all the license
details at:
http://snipurl.com/bkt
Basically, what it comes down to is that we need everyone to sign a
document saying that, for all the
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:58:55PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Angel,
> This is the numeric literals part, reformated to follow Michael's
> outline.
My contribution is some copyediting and a few suggestions. Take what
you think is worthwhile.
> --
29 matches
Mail list logo
