Anyway, i just wanted to add this because I dont think that you can
take it for granted that all perl5porters believe the core module set
should be as restricted as possible. I dont. I believe that the core
should contain out of the box enough support for the various platforms
that perl runs on th
On 4/4/06, Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (*) Yes, I know that the core Perl distribution includes many modules,
> but ask any P5Porter and he'll answer you that the core is over-crowed
> and that all core modules that can be made dual-life should be released
> on the CPAN.
On 4/4/06, Tyler MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >OTOH, who still runs pre-5.8.x code deserves what they get.
> > >
> > >There are horrible bugs in older Perls, and I don't know why people
> > >still
> > >insist using insecure, buggy
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 08:24:51PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: There's some discussion about whether it should simply be:
:
: method as (Str) {...}
: method as (Int) {...}
:
: maybe with an "is deep" thrown in for good measure, but we haven't
: quite got there yet.
Er, to have multiple of
On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 07:23:28PM -0700, Joshua Choi wrote:
: Kudos to all on the Perl 6 mailing list,
:
: What's the conceptual difference (or relationship) between context and type
: coercion? Is
: $moose.prefix:<~>
: the same as
: $moose.coerce:(Str)
: for instance?
No difference.
:
Kudos to all on the Perl 6 mailing list,
What's the conceptual difference (or relationship) between context and type
coercion? Is
$moose.prefix:<~>
the same as
$moose.coerce:(Str)
for instance?
And forgive my brain, but how would you nicely define coercion in a class?
Like, could you spar
On Sun, Apr 02, 2006 at 02:32:03AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Given perl6's use of unicode as a basis, could we get "curly quotes",
: both single and double, to do the same things that straight quotes do?
Depends on what "same thing" means, I suppose. Looks like you want
them directional, whic
On Monday 03 April 2006 13:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd07_codingstd.pod
> ===
>=== --- trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd07_codingstd.pod (original)
> @@ -760,6 +761,79 @@
> TBC ... Any contr
On Sunday 02 April 2006 21:17, Andy Lester wrote:
> Here's my first patch. Let me know if y'all see this sort of work as
> useful, or if I shouldn't bother.
Please continue.
In the next round of their scans, Coverity may add Parrot to the list of
projects.
For various annoying reasons, I can'
Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >OTOH, who still runs pre-5.8.x code deserves what they get.
> >
> >There are horrible bugs in older Perls, and I don't know why people
> >still
> >insist using insecure, buggy and feature-lacking code like 5.6. or even
> >gasp 5.004. Just th
Tels wrote:
Moin,
Hello Tels,
OTOH, who still runs pre-5.8.x code deserves what they get.
There are horrible bugs in older Perls, and I don't know why people
still
insist using insecure, buggy and feature-lacking code like 5.6. or even
gasp 5.004. Just think "Unicode support", "hash rando
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
I remember working with some module that had tests something like:
use Test::More;
plan tests => numtests();
...
is($foo, $bar, 'foo is bar');
sub numtests { 13 }
So that when you added a new test to the bottom, the number to modify
was right there a
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
I remember working with some module that had tests something like:
use Test::More;
plan tests => numtests();
...
is($foo, $bar, 'foo is bar');
sub numtests { 13 }
So that when you added a new test to the bottom, the number to modify
was right there a
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 3 15:59:38 2006
New Revision: 8556
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
Fixed P5isms in P6 code.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod(
Author: autrijus
Date: Mon Apr 3 15:48:30 2006
New Revision: 8555
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
* S06: Make it clear that concat-means-concat for duplicated
named arguments, and that it is possible to bind a tuple
into a scalar.
sub fun (Int @x) { ... }
f
On 4/3/06, Amos Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is perl 6, right?
> my %hash; $hash{foo}{bar} - shouldn't it be %hash{foo}{bar}?
%hash even.
Luke
This is perl 6, right?
my %hash; $hash{foo}{bar} - shouldn't it be %hash{foo}{bar}?
On 4/3/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Author: autrijus
> Date: Mon Apr 3 05:47:07 2006
> New Revision: 8553
>
> Modified:
>doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
>
> Log:
> * S09: Leo pointed out the
Author: petdance
Date: Mon Apr 3 13:29:21 2006
New Revision: 12104
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd07_codingstd.pod
Log:
Added section on const and localizing variables. Also, cleaned up some
whitespce
Modified: trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd07_codingstd.pod
===
On Apr 3, 2006, at 21:04, Bernhard Schmalhofer (via RT) wrote:
I propose to replace the enum value PARROT_EXEC_CORE with the two new
values : PARROT_EXEC_COMPILE_CORE and PARROT_EXEC_RUN_CORE.
This should make the code more clear and might limit the use of the
shared variable 'Parrot_exec_run'
# New Ticket Created by Bernhard Schmalhofer
# Please include the string: [perl #38841]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38841 >
The exec runcore is about saving compiled JIT code in an object file and
gener
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
# Please include the string: [perl #38840]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=38840 >
The following files reference '/dev/null/' directly, and should be
updated to use the
I know, now people will come out of the wood and say that they have that
old system, and no, they can't upgrade Perl etc, never touch a running
system etc yadda yadda. But what the heck do you then try to upgrade
modules on said system when you didn't want to "touch the system"?
To quote pos
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 3 11:08:54 2006
New Revision: 8554
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
Log:
Mark Biggar points out that rule closure section had embedded closure verbiage.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
=
Moin,
On Sunday 02 April 2006 16:37, Sébastien Aperghis-Tramoni wrote:
> Adam Kennedy wrote:
[snip]
> This is a little harder with Module::Build as it has a few dependencies
> that ask 5.005 or 5.6, although in some cases incorrectly. I send
> patches so modules like File::Temp or ExtUtils::Consta
Author: autrijus
Date: Mon Apr 3 05:47:07 2006
New Revision: 8553
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S09: Leo pointed out the paragraph on autovivifiction
is still mentioning references. Replace it with modern
wording (surface semantics stays unchanged)
Modified: doc/trunk/d
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 10:20:29AM +0100, Tels wrote:
B when it breaks, end-users cannot fix the problem for themselves, they
need to bug the author and he has to release a new version. (Good luck
with that with sparsely maintained modules...)
Last time this hap
Andy Lester wrote:
I've been spending a lot of time the past 6 months (more?) doing source
code cleanup on the Perl 5 source code.
Welcome @ parrot, Andy.
I'd like to spend some time doing the same for Parrot, too. I hope that
doing the kind of maintenance I'm interested in makes things easi
I remember working with some module that had tests something like:
use Test::More;
plan tests => numtests();
...
is($foo, $bar, 'foo is bar');
sub numtests { 13 }
So that when you added a new test to the bottom, the number to modify
was right there also. Ring a bell with anyone?
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 10:20:29AM +0100, Tels wrote:
> B when it breaks, end-users cannot fix the problem for themselves, they
> need to bug the author and he has to release a new version. (Good luck
> with that with sparsely maintained modules...)
Last time this happened to me, I just replaced
Luke Closs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 01, 2006 at 04:04:42PM -0800, Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote:
> What makes pairing good is the increased attention to code as it
> comes out. The pair discusses the implementation, which not only
> finds lots of simple bugs very early, it also:
>
> -
30 matches
Mail list logo
