I took a first pass at a perlcritic test: t/codingstd/perlcritic.t ;
this test isn't run by default.
It reports on only the following perlcritic rules at the moment:
TestingAndDebugging::RequireUseStrict
TestingAndDebugging::RequireUseWarnings
Variables::ProhibitConditionalDeclarat
Darren Duncan wrote:
>> Perhaps, but then Junctions might not assume elements have equality or
>> identity operations defined.
>>
> As I recall, every type in Perl 6 has an equality and identity
> operation defined because the Object superclass provides one. If
> nothing else, the type's eq
On Tuesday 26 September 2006 16:44, Allison Randal wrote:
> Also, any reactions to the distinction that async ops return status
> objects while sync ops return integer error codes? Sync opcodes could
> have 2 signatures, one with an integer return type (int error code) and
> one with a PMC return
I've committed an updated I/O PDD. I'm close to pronouncing this ready
to implement, so get in your comments now.
One piece that is currently missing is a discussion of which lightweight
concurrency model we're going to use for the asynchronous operations.
I've had ongoing back-channel convers
At 8:13 PM +1200 9/26/06, Sam Vilain wrote:
Darren Duncan wrote:
> Within a system that already has an underlying
set-like type, the Junction in this case, a test
for uniqueness is (pardon any spelling):
all(@items).elements.size === @items.size
The all() will strip any duplicates, so
On Tuesday 26 September 2006 15:27, Watson Ladd wrote:
> How will call and ret opcodes interact with continuations?
The opcodes invoke the appropriate continuations.
I feel like I'm missing some subtlety in your question. Are you looking for
specific detail on something?
-- c
TSa wrote:
> HaloO,
>
> Sam Vilain wrote:
>
>> perl -MPerl6::Junction=one,all -le '@foo=qw(1 2 3 4); print "yes" if
>> (all(@foo) eq one(@foo))'
>> yes
>>
>
> But does it fail for duplicates? I guess not because junctions
> eliminate duplicates and you end up testing unique values as
> abov
How will call and ret opcodes interact with continuations?
Thanks,
Watson Ladd
--
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security,
deserve neither liberty or security
--Benjamin Franklin
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
A very simple concept, but one that has entirely changed the project for
me. (Blame Mark Shuttleworth.) The single most important thing is
shipping a 1.0 release of Parrot. We're so close I can taste it, but not
there yet. Elegant theory is a beautiful thing, but what we need now is
cold, hard
Author: allison
Date: Tue Sep 26 14:52:16 2006
New Revision: 14741
Modified:
trunk/docs/pdds/clip/pdd22_io.pod
Changes in other areas also in this revision:
Modified:
trunk/ (props changed)
Log:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: allison | 2006-09-26 14:46:14 -0700
A first release candidate on the I/
There seems to be the impression that generating PIR calls from a compiler is
hard because it may look like:
$S0 = obj.'_meth'(arg1, arg2)
but this also works:
.pcc_begin
.arg "hello"
.arg "\n"
.invocant obj
.meth_call "_meth"
.result $S0
.pcc_end
There's a simila
TSa writes:
> I'm very glad, too. Even though I would like the new operator
> spelled / for aesthetic reason.
I think there'd be problems making that work. It's a prefix operator,
so it has to appear in term position, and we already have terms that
begin with C, in the form of regexes. Forcing r
HaloO,
Sam Vilain wrote:
Ah, yes, a notable omission. I understood a Seq as a list with
individual types for each element, which are applied positionally.
I can understand that the type-checker can produce this type
for immutable sequences.
The
superclass for things like Pair.
Hmm, have
Author: audreyt
Date: Tue Sep 26 03:07:20 2006
New Revision: 12432
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
* S03: Document that chained comparisons short-circuit,
and never evaluates its arguments more than once.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
==
HaloO,
is this subject not of interest? I just wanted to start a
discussion about the class composition process and how a
role designer can require the class to provide an equal
method and then augment it to achieve the correct behavior.
Contrast that with the need to do the same in every class
t
Darren Duncan wrote:
> Unless I'm mistaken, you may be going about this the wrong way.
>
> Within a system that already has an underlying
> set-like type, the Junction in this case, a test
> for uniqueness is (pardon any spelling):
>
>all(@items).elements.size === @items.size
>
> The all() wi
With the following patch, the extension Parrot-Embed compiles and runs on
Win32.
I work with :
MinGW (gcc 3.4.2)
Perl 5.8.8 (build 817 ActiveState)
I use an old fashion Makefile.PL (Module::Build is not in latest
ActiveState distribution)
I move ext/Parrot-Embed/lib/Parrot/Emb
HaloO,
Luke Palmer wrote:
Woohoo! I was about to complain about this whole "capture sigil"
nonsense, but I'm guessing somebody else already did. I also like the
new [,] :-)
I'm very glad, too. Even though I would like the new operator
spelled / for aesthetic reason.
Regards,
--
Miroslav Silovic wrote:
> TSa wrote:
>
>>> role Set[::T = Item] does Collection[T] where {
>>> all(.members) =:= one(.members);
>>> };
>>>
>> Nice usage of junctions!
>>
>>
>
> But buggy - one means *exactly* one. So for an array of more than 1
> element, all(@array) never
HaloO,
Sam Vilain wrote:
perl -MPerl6::Junction=one,all -le '@foo=qw(1 2 3 4); print "yes" if
(all(@foo) eq one(@foo))'
yes
But does it fail for duplicates? I guess not because junctions
eliminate duplicates and you end up testing unique values as
above. E.g. all(1,1,2) == one(1,1,2) might act
On 9/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Log:
Slaughter of special [,], now is just listop form of [...]
To support |func() syntax, | is the new * (desigilized)
Woohoo! I was about to complain about this whole "capture sigil"
nonsense, but I'm guessing somebody else already di
21 matches
Mail list logo
