Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek wrote: Moritz Lenz schrieb: What makes Perl hard to read is the excessive use of special characters (/\W/). I disagree: The make it look ugly, but not hard to read. Even if it's "only" ugly: To what advantage? I don't think ugliness is a good characteristic of a programming la

[perl #42919] [BUG] and [PATCH] overriding 'invoke' requires current object to be explicitly passed

And reverted in r18541. The patch is fragile. Broken on Windows, and fixing it for Windows breaks it for OSX and Linux. Allison

Re: Sigils by example

Language design is hard. Let's go shopping! :-) Larry

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 02:02:06AM +0200, Thomas Wittek wrote: > John Macdonald schrieb: > > It's also, in many cases, > > harder to edit - that's why a trailing comma in a list that > > is surrounded by parens, or a trailing semicolon in a block > > surrounded by braces, is easier to manage. > >

[perl #42950] [PATCH] mswin32 (msvc) builds don't need -lodbc32

# New Ticket Created by Mark Glines # Please include the string: [perl #42950] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42950 > Someone in #parrot tried to build parrot today after stripping irrelevant stuff from his

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

OK! Be concrete ! :-) ( Hart wie Beton !) As Ruby and Python are getting more and more attraction [1][2] I think they do something right, that Perl doesn't. What I think where both (especially Python) do better is in readable code. What makes Perl hard to read is the excessive use of special

Re: variable type specific sigils (was Re: Sigils by example)

At 5:00 PM -0700 5/14/07, Darren Duncan wrote: On the other hand, unless this steps on something, I could suggest dropping the @ and % anyway, so we have $array and $hash, and then we could instead use the @ and % sigils as a prefix to indicate in that case that we want them to copy by value.

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On 5/14/07, Thomas Wittek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Moritz Lenz schrieb: >> What makes Perl hard to read is the excessive use of special characters >> (/\W/). > > I disagree: The make it look ugly, but not hard to read. Even if it's "only" ugly: To what advantage? I don't think ugliness is a g

[perl #42947] [PATCH] revise Parrot_get_runtime_prefix API for safety and usablility

# New Ticket Created by Mike Mattie # Please include the string: [perl #42947] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42947 > Hello, This patch changes the Parrot_get_runtime_prefix API from char* Parrot_get_runti

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

On 5/14/07, Daniel Hulme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:29:11PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote: > 2. This brings up the possibility of custom-designed termination > operators. cf. Semi::Semicolons. Close. I'm thinking "added functionality for semicolon alternatives" rather

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

John Macdonald schrieb: > It's also, in many cases, > harder to edit - that's why a trailing comma in a list that > is surrounded by parens, or a trailing semicolon in a block > surrounded by braces, is easier to manage. Now that the list is surrounded by parens makes clear that it ends with the c

variable type specific sigils (was Re: Sigils by example)

Speaking just for my own preferences, I very much like having sigils to differentiate variables from routines, that is, a $ prefix versus either & or no prefix. However, I generally do *not* like the @ and % prefixes. They seem somewhat contrived so to cover very specific variable types while

Re: Sigils by example

Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-15 1:52 (+0200): > Would it be a good idea to call methods on objects, that never thought > of this methods? Absolutely! Roles can be used for that too. -- korajn salutojn, juerd waalboer: perl hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> convolution:

Re: Sigils by example (was: Re: Is Perl 6 too late?)

Mark J. Reed wrote: Jonathan Lang wrote: > Good examples. Now could you provide some to explain to me why it's > important to distinguish between '$', '@', '%', and '&'? I ask > because I've seen a lot of object-based code that has said stuff like > '$container{$key}'; Well, $container{$key} i

Re: Sigils by example

chromatic schrieb: > On Monday 14 May 2007 15:48:24 Thomas Wittek wrote: > >> But it should be no problem to put out a warning/error at runtime (or >> maybe even at compile time) when a variable name clashes with a method >> name. > > Do you always know all of the method names in your entire memo

Re: Sigils by example

Juerd Waalboer schrieb: > Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-15 0:48 (+0200): >>> The Perl Way: >>> $object.foo() calls the method called "foo". >>> $object.$foo() calls the method that is in the variable $foo. >> My way: >> someref = &somemethod >> object.someref() >> Of course you could argue that yo

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-15 1:03 (+0200): > > On the other hand, the overall structure of a program is often more > > obvious, exactly because so much more fits in one screenful. > My suggestions won't have an impact on the expressiveness of Perl. Not so. Consider /@foo/, which is an altern

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 01:22:48AM +0200, Thomas Wittek wrote: > Andrew Shitov: > > If the line of code is not ended with ';' the parser tries first > > to assume [..] > > Wouldn't that be unambigous? > > foo = 23 > bar = \ >42 > > ? > > I think there would be no ambiguities and you o

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Austin Hastings: > A similar trade-off exists with the statement terminating semicolon. In > this case, it involves the number of statements per line: > > A language that terminates statements can ignore whitespace, allowing > multiple statements per line and statements that span multiple lines.

Re: Sigils by example

On Monday 14 May 2007 15:48:24 Thomas Wittek wrote: > But it should be no problem to put out a warning/error at runtime (or > maybe even at compile time) when a variable name clashes with a method > name. Do you always know all of the method names in your entire memory space at compile time? --

Re: Sigils by example (was: Re: Is Perl 6 too late?)

Jonathan Lang skribis 2007-05-14 14:52 (-0700): > Good examples. Now could you provide some to explain to me why it's > important to distinguish between '$', '@', '%', and '&'? It's useful code self documentation, but not very important, in my opinion. If you have sigils, it makes sense to have

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

Andrew Shitov: > If the line of code is not ended with ';' the parser tries first > to assume [..] Wouldn't that be unambigous? foo = 23 bar = \ 42 ? I think there would be no ambiguities and you only had to add additional syntax for the rare cases instead of the common cases. -- Tho

Re: Sigils by example

Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-15 0:48 (+0200): > > The Perl Way: > > $object.foo() calls the method called "foo". > > $object.$foo() calls the method that is in the variable $foo. > My way: > someref = &somemethod > object.someref() > Of course you could argue that you don't know in advance, if "o

Feeling Slushy

Hi everyone, I'm handling the release tomorrow, so please hold off on changes to the core code until after the release. Documentation and typo fixes are fine. Language changes are fine too. Not-too-invasive bug fixes are good. In the meantime, I'd like to collect platform status results, smo

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:29:11PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote: > 2. This brings up the possibility of custom-designed termination > operators. cf. Semi::Semicolons. I think that being flexible enough that people can write packages like that is one of Perl < 6's greatest strengths. Long may it con

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Juerd Waalboer schrieb: > Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-14 0:42 (+0200): >> excessive use of special characters (/\W/). > > This seems to be "I don't like regexes". Ignoring for now that Perl 6 > regexes will be more verbose and thus easier to read for someone without > much prior exposure to the

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek wrote: chromatic wrote: theproblemlinguisticallyspeakingisthatsometimes [snipped] I can't remember that I said that you shouldn't separate your expressions (by punctation/whitspaces), $.but! (*adding$ %*characters _+that^# &$might) @#not_ !#be() !&necessary_ *#$doesn't! *

Re: Sigils by example

Juerd Waalboer wrote: > Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-14 22:20 (+0200): >> But I think that the name of an identifier (noun/verb, single/plural, >> the meaning of the word) already gives enough context to understand what >> type it is. > > [examples] You are right, I should have weakened this sent

Re: Sigils by example (was: Re: Is Perl 6 too late?)

On 5/14/07, Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Good examples. Now could you provide some to explain to me why it's important to distinguish between '$', '@', '%', and '&'? I ask because I've seen a lot of object-based code that has said stuff like '$container{$key}'; Well, $container{$k

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

Jonathan Lang wrote: ^[3]: If this were included in the core, you might even reverse things so that ';' is defined in terms of postfix:<.> or infix:{'<=='}, depending on the context; in this case, postfix: would be defined in terms of postfix:<.>, rather than postfix:<;>. In fact, the only thing

Re: Sigils by example (was: Re: Is Perl 6 too late?)

Good examples. Now could you provide some to explain to me why it's important to distinguish between '$', '@', '%', and '&'? I ask because I've seen a lot of object-based code that has said stuff like '$container{$key}'; it seems that there's an assumption that $foo can be used as a list, a hash

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

gabriele renzi wrote: Hi everyone, I don't want to argue about the design of perl6, I just wonder: why the semicolon is still needed in the end of lines in perl6? It isn't - sometimes. S03 identifies a number of ways that an expression can be terminated: the semicolon (';'), a block-final ('}

Re[2]: explicit line termination with ";": why?

> Aankhen wrote: > Speaking of JavaScript, any experienced JavaScript programmer will > tell you that while semi-colons are in fact optional, you should > always treat them as mandatory, to avoid subtle errors creeping into > your code. We should also note that the idea of omitting ';' is not as

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-14 22:31 (+0200): > $.but! (*adding$ %*characters _+that^# &$might) @#not_ !#be() > !&necessary_ *#$doesn't! *(make) [EMAIL PROTECTED] =_easier Those characters are meaningless. The many symbols in Perl 6 have very distinct meanings, which makes them very powerful too

Sigils by example (was: Re: Is Perl 6 too late?)

Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-14 22:20 (+0200): > But I think that the name of an identifier (noun/verb, single/plural, > the meaning of the word) already gives enough context to understand what > type it is. So is "user_id" a variable or a type? How about "substring" or "document"? Is "new" a fu

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

At 11:43 -0700 5/14/07, Larry Wall wrote: >In other words, the sigil is consistently a noun marker in Perl 6, even when a >sigil is used on a verb. It would seem to me that a preprocessor, written in perl of course, could easily respond to "DIMENSION noun AS double" statements or whatever you li

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

On 5/14/07, Andrew Shitov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: JavaScript allows to omit semicolumn. Speaking of JavaScript, any experienced JavaScript programmer will tell you that while semi-colons are in fact optional, you should always treat them as mandatory, to avoid subtle errors creeping into you

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

chromatic wrote: > theproblemlinguisticallyspeakingisthatsometimes [snipped] I can't remember that I said that you shouldn't separate your expressions (by punctation/whitspaces), $.but! (*adding$ %*characters _+that^# &$might) @#not_ !#be() !&necessary_ *#$doesn't! *(make) [EMAIL PROTECTED] =_easi

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Frank Wiles schrieb: > Take a look at > actual code written in other languages and you'll find many variable > names that end in things like _ary, _array, _dict, _list, etc. Actually I've not seen that often. Where I've seen it frequently is in Visual Basic and Delphi/Pascal. I hated it too. But

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 07:05:01PM +0200, gabriele renzi wrote: : Hi everyone, : : I don't want to argue about the design of perl6[1], I just wonder: why : the semicolon is still needed in the end of lines in perl6? : : I can think of different reasons (history, readability, easier parsing : of

Re[2]: explicit line termination with ";": why?

> JavaScript allows to omit semicolumn. Sorry, s/lumn/lon/. By the way, Perl also ignors semicolumn :-) -- Andrew Shitov __ [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.shitov.ru

explicit line termination with ";": why?

Hi everyone, I don't want to argue about the design of perl6[1], I just wonder: why the semicolon is still needed in the end of lines in perl6? I can think of different reasons (history, readability, easier parsing of multiline statements, force people to write one-line functions to avoid ty

Re: explicit line termination with ";": why?

> I don't want to argue about the design of perl6[1], I just wonder: why > the semicolon is still needed in the end of lines in perl6? JavaScript allows to omit semicolumn. In lecture at Yahoo's YUI Theatre one of JS's gurus talked about how it is organized in JavaScript parser. If the line of co

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

OK! Be concrete ! :-) ( Hart wie Beton !) As Ruby and Python are getting more and more attraction [1][2] I think they do something right, that Perl doesn't. What I think where both (especially Python) do better is in readable code. What makes Perl hard to read is the excessive use of specia

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:21:47PM -0400, Ryan Richter wrote: : In Perl 6, the & sigil is used to distinguish between : : foo bar : : which calls bar and passes the return value to foo, and : : foo &bar : : which passes bar as a Code object to foo. In other words, the sigil is consistently a n

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek skribis 2007-05-14 0:42 (+0200): > excessive use of special characters (/\W/). This seems to be "I don't like regexes". Ignoring for now that Perl 6 regexes will be more verbose and thus easier to read for someone without much prior exposure to them, what would you suggest as an alt

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 20:41:35 +0300, Gabor Szabo wrote: > On 5/14/07, John Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Removing the sigil > > on a function call (it used to always be written &sub(args...)) > > did, I think, lead to the difficulty in perl5 where it became > > difficult to add new k

Re: [perl #42919] [BUG] and [PATCH] overriding 'invoke' requires current object to be explicitly passed

On 5/10/07, via RT Alek Storm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: # New Ticket Created by "Alek Storm" # Please include the string: [perl #42919] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42919 > Because PIR can't tell the diff

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On Mon, 14 May 2007 12:51:53 +0200 Thomas Wittek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Reason? I still haven't seen a good justification for sigils. This may not qualify as a "good justification", but it is one I've discussed with others and rings true for many. Take a look at actual code writ

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On 5/14/07, John Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Removing the sigil on a function call (it used to always be written &sub(args...)) did, I think, lead to the difficulty in perl5 where it became difficult to add new keyword operators to the language - because they could conflict with subrout

Re: Parrot trunk: "The submitted smoke has an invalid format"

Gaal Yahas wrote: On 5/14/07, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: # svn co https://svn.perl.org/parrot/trunk parrot # cd parrot; perl Makefile.PL # make smoke [...] * Sending data to smokeserver "http://smoke.parrotcode.org/smoke/";... error: The submitted smoke has an invalid

[svn:perl6-synopsis] r14390 - doc/trunk/design/syn

Author: larry Date: Mon May 14 10:13:16 2007 New Revision: 14390 Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod Log: coercion type renamed from "returns" to "as" to avoid confusion with "of" type. ambiguity in block-end parsing noted by r

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Moritz Lenz wrote: > Thomas Wittek wrote: >> Moritz Lenz schrieb: I would also like semicolons to be optional. >>> Most people don't ;-). >> Oh, really? Source? :) > > I paraphrased Larry Wall. Iirc it was "everybody wants the semicolon" or > something - correct me if I'm wrong. sorry, masa

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek wrote: > BTW: Why do so much people say "go away if you don't like it" instead of > being open for ideas and discussing them from a neutral point of view? because the design process of perl 6 started long time ago, and if we incooperate major changes to it, no implementation will eve

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Thomas Wittek wrote: > Moritz Lenz schrieb: >>> What makes Perl hard to read is the excessive use of special characters >>> (/\W/). >> >> I disagree: The make it look ugly, but not hard to read. > > Even if it's "only" ugly: To what advantage? I don't think ugliness is a > good characteristic of a

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On Monday 14 May 2007 04:35:19 Thomas Wittek wrote: > BTW: Why do so much people say "go away if you don't like it" instead of > being open for ideas and discussing them from a neutral point of view? Perhaps you're not a native English speaker, but running into the room and saying "Perl 6 doesn'

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On Monday 14 May 2007 04:28:15 Thomas Wittek wrote: > > I'm not a friend of potential conflicts between built-in operators and my > > identifier names (and especially the conflicts between scalar, aggregate, > > type, and function names). > As I partially wrote Moritz, I > a) don't think that it'

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 02:36:10PM +0200, Thomas Wittek wrote: > Andy Armstrong schrieb: > >On 14 May 2007, at 12:31, Thomas Wittek wrote: > >>How did C, C#, Java, Ruby, Python, Lua, JavaScript, Visual Basic, etc. > >>know? > >>They didn't. > >>If there is a new release, you always have to check i

Re: Parrot trunk: "The submitted smoke has an invalid format"

On 5/14/07, Cosimo Streppone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: # svn co https://svn.perl.org/parrot/trunk parrot # cd parrot; perl Makefile.PL # make smoke smoke.html has been generated. /usr/bin/perl tools/util/smokeserv-client.pl smoke.html * smokeserv-client v0.4 started. * Gzip compression

[perl #42918] [PATCH] src/library.c use mem_sys_free instead of free()

On Mon May 14 05:08:56 2007, codermattie wrote: > On Thu, 10 May 2007 12:18:00 -0700 > "chromatic via RT" at parrotcode.org> wrote: > > > On Thursday 10 May 2007 02:37:15 Mike Mattie wrote: > > > > > quick patch to use the mem_sys_free wrapper instead of using the > > > platform's free() direct

[perl #42944] [PATCH] new parrot path handling API from static functions in src/library.c

# New Ticket Created by Mike Mattie # Please include the string: [perl #42944] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=42944 > Hello, This is a patch, and two new files: parrot/include/path.h src/path.c These chan

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Andy Armstrong schrieb: On 14 May 2007, at 12:31, Thomas Wittek wrote: How did C, C#, Java, Ruby, Python, Lua, JavaScript, Visual Basic, etc. know? They didn't. If there is a new release, you always have to check if your code still runs. I think that may be the point I'm making. Your point

[PATCH] Add a few clarifying comments about res_lea.c

This patch adds a few clarifications to comments. And I'm afraid this is how I'll have to leave it for now. diff -r -u parrot-current/include/parrot/pobj.h parrot-andy/include/parrot/pobj.h --- parrot-current/include/parrot/pobj.h2007-05-13 19:15:14.0 -0400 +++ parrot-andy/incl

Parrot Bug Summary

Parrot Bug Summary http://rt.perl.org/rt3/NoAuth/parrot/Overview.html Generated at Mon May 14 13:01:05 2007 GMT --- * Numbers * New Issues * Overview of Open Issues * Ticket Status By Version * Requestors with m

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

> herbert breunung schrieb: > > please make a decision for you to program in a language [..] > > [..] try python. [..] > > Oh, just because I think that they've some smart design decisions? > Why not steal them? > > BTW: Why do so much people say "go away if you don't like it" instead of > bei

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

I'm so tired of hearing how unreadable Perl is. It's specious. "But if so many people think it..." Uh-uh. Instinctive reactions can be both universal and incorrect...and I think that's what this is. At least, among those who have even bothered to look into Perl instead of just repeating FUD.

Re: [perl #42918] [PATCH] src/library.c use mem_sys_free instead of free()

On Thu, 10 May 2007 12:18:00 -0700 "chromatic via RT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thursday 10 May 2007 02:37:15 Mike Mattie wrote: > > > quick patch to use the mem_sys_free wrapper instead of using the > > platform's free() directly. > > I only see an OpenPGP signature attachment; can you re

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

herbert breunung schrieb: please make a decision for you to program in a language [..] > [..] try python. [..] Oh, just because I think that they've some smart design decisions? Why not steal them? BTW: Why do so much people say "go away if you don't like it" instead of being open for ideas a

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On 14 May 2007, at 12:31, Thomas Wittek wrote: How did C, C#, Java, Ruby, Python, Lua, JavaScript, Visual Basic, etc. know? They didn't. If there is a new release, you always have to check if your code still runs. I think that may be the point I'm making. -- Andy Armstrong, hexten.net

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Andy Armstrong schrieb: On 14 May 2007, at 11:51, Thomas Wittek wrote: I also can't remember that I ever named a variable like a "reserved word" or operator. And even if I could, I'd consider it to be bad style. How did you know which reserved words and operators were going to be introduced i

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

chromatic wrote: Global variables with cryptic names, that no beginner can make any sense of by reading it. And after not working with "$<" for some months I can't remember it either, although I've got quite some Perl experience. Most of those have gone away. Oh, some someone must agree that

Re: dlopen(NULL) ?

It doesn't work on Win32 too. "chromatic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Sunday 13 May 2007 16:30:23 Mike Mattie wrote: > >> I am working on src/dynext.c and I ran across this in get_path. >> >> if (lib == NULL) { >> *handle = Parrot_dlopen((char *)NU

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

On 14 May 2007, at 11:51, Thomas Wittek wrote: I also can't remember that I ever named a variable like a "reserved word" or operator. And even if I could, I'd consider it to be bad style. How did you know which reserved words and operators were going to be introduced in the future so you c

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

Moritz Lenz schrieb: What makes Perl hard to read is the excessive use of special characters (/\W/). I disagree: The make it look ugly, but not hard to read. Even if it's "only" ugly: To what advantage? I don't think ugliness is a good characteristic of a programming language. Global vari

Parrot trunk: "The submitted smoke has an invalid format"

Hi all, I'm trying to get my feet wet with Parrot, and I'd like to contribute also for what I can. Today I did a: # svn co https://svn.perl.org/parrot/trunk parrot # cd parrot; perl Makefile.PL # make smoke Results follow (tried also last week or so with parrot 0.4.11, had the same resul

Re: Is Perl 6 too late?

> And to attract contributors, you have to have a convincing vision. right please make a decision for you to program in a language that has fame or one that you like most. as moritz said the special variables are now better sorted and some changes you write about are too far from perls basic pr

[perl #42919] [BUG] and [PATCH] overriding 'invoke' requires current object to be explicitly passed

Thanks, applied in r18535 with some modifications. Particularly, changed the name of the flag from PARROT_ARG_OBJECT to PARROT_ARG_INVOCANT, moved the code for handling object overrides of 'invoke' from delegate.pmc to parrotobject.pmc, and kept the regression test for RT #41732 (still relevant, it