On 9/28/06, Agent Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi~
lanny noticed yesterday that the Synopses on the smoke server were
different from the ones on feather. Because I am maintaining the
feather ones, I know the synopses there are being resync'd every hour
as expected.
As of this writing, the f
Author: audreyt
Date: Sat Sep 30 20:16:38 2006
New Revision: 12533
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S02: Re-introduce comprehension, this time not context-specific,
under the list() syntactic expression:
# list() comprehension that evalu
Author: audreyt
Date: Sat Sep 30 20:13:47 2006
New Revision: 12531
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
* S09: any() no longer has anything to do with comprehension.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
==
--
On Tue Sep 19 10:10:45 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 September 2006 07:56, jerry gay wrote:
>
> > ~ all non-perl test files must have a shebang
> >
> > i strongly suggest that this be extended to cover all test files.
> > then, as you say, it can easily be tested, and it's value
Thanks, applied as 14812
Paul -
Thank you for your work on this: it's a solid patch, I'd apply it...
... But I've just rolled this test into the recently added
t/codingstd/perlcritic.t by way of a
Perl::Critic policy class that's been added to the repo.
Please don't be discouraged. =-)
Check out lib/Perl/Critic/Polic
From: Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:23:54 -0500
On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 11:48:04AM -0700, Joshua Choi wrote:
> How does automatic coercion work?
[ deletia ]
> 1. C automatically coerces its C arguments into C
> parameters because C.
Wouldn
On Sat, Sep 30, 2006 at 11:48:04AM -0700, Joshua Choi wrote:
> How does automatic coercion work?
[ deletia ]
> 1. C automatically coerces its C arguments into C
> parameters because C.
> 2. C then automatically coerces its C arguments into
> C parameters because C.
>
> ...Or am I completely off t
# New Ticket Created by Kevin Tew
# Please include the string: [perl #40438]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=40438 >
Adding PIR methods to dynpmcs doesn't work.
When executed parrot just reports method not fo
My understanding is that "does" will prevent coercion. In particular,
it is erroneous to say that 'Str does Num' or that 'Num does Str'.
If you say 'Foo does Bar', what this means is that anything Bar can
do, Foo can do, too. As such, any routine that asks for a Bar can
just as easily be given
Am Samstag, 30. September 2006 20:13 schrieb chromatic:
> I believe that the Linux kernel at least supports alternate loaders
> (besides ld.so) when it knows the magic fingerprint at the start of a file.
See also /usr/src/linux/Documentation/mono.txt, which is of course just a
specific incarnatio
Kudos to all(@Larry)!
How does automatic coercion work? Like, when a routine wants a
parameter of a certain type, and is called with an argument of a
different type that C
(For instance, is it something a little like this?
multi sum ( Num $addend1, Num $addend2 --> Num ) { ... }
multi say ( S
On Saturday 30 September 2006 10:00, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Finally, if you have a situation where having something that will Just
> Execute as a native binary is important, then I guess there's the exec
> runcore that will produce you an executable file.
I believe that the Linux kernel at
Ben Morrow wrote:
This is probably too late for a change like this, in which case ignore
me,
No, not too late - it's still a draft so there's time for suggestions.
but I don't suppose there's any chance that pbc files could allow an optional
#! line, so that they can be used as executables d
14 matches
Mail list logo
