-Original Message-
From: Bart Lateur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 7:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PROTOPROPOSAL FOR NEW BACKSLASH was Re: implied pascal-like
"with" or "express"
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000 00:03:48 -0600 (MDT), Nathan Torkington wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Scott Duff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 1:06 PM
To: David L. Nicol
Cc: Nathan Torkington; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PROTOPROPOSAL FOR NEW BACKSLASH is still Re: implied
pascal-like"with" or "express"
[...]
How special p
-Original Message-
From: Tony Olekshy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 8:26 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Exception stack: let's use the @@ list.
> Ok, uncle.
Thanks.
Hey, when your right...
> I think C was already going to operate on $@ by default
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think what David wanted was an easy way
to reference other keys of an hash while creating one, ie:
How to do this, in a line:
%h = ( first => 10 );
$h{second} = $h{first} * 2;
Because, as I'm sure you know, this code (when run w/out strict):
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Howard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
[...]
Programmers shouldn't have to know how a
computer implements things behind the scenes--which is really what requiring
explicit looping forces.
Great point, this should be in the RFC.
-Corwin
-Original Message-
From: Tony Olekshy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 6:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Exception stack: let's use the @@ list.
That's well and good, but the source code syntax says it's a block,
not a sub. Am I supposed to spend the r
# # -Original Message-
# # From: Tony Olekshy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
# # Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 4:01 PM
# # To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# # Subject: Re: Exception stack: let's use the @@ list.
# # Peter Scott wrote:
# # >
# # > Brust, Corwin wrote:
# # > >
# #
[snip]
-Original Message-
From: Markus Peter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Another way to achieve the same result would be to NOT get rid of the try
part of try/catch and then try automatically implies use fatal for that
block...
--
Markus Peter
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[/snip]
So that was:
[snip]
-Original Message-
From: Chaim Frenkel [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 12:43 AM
To: Tony Olekshy
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RFC 88: Possible problem with shared lexical scope.
Could you tell me why you would want two finallys?
Why not put them i
-Original Message-
From: Damian Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
And don't forget to include my idea that $ME be scoped locally like
$AUTOLOAD, so that the "self" and "this" and "I" and "myself" camps can
have their respective cakes but the rest of us don't have to eat them:
[...]
-Original Message-
From: Tony Olekshy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
So, now you can say:
catch grep { $_->isa("Foo") } @@ { ... }
Ok, I think I could learn that.
"Brust, Corwin" wrote:
>
> In the context of a catch block, if could @_ contain th
-Original Message-
From: Ed Mills [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>Excellent idea- anything to get to production faster!
>
>But don't {} or {1} sort of do the same thing?
I think the point here is readability, not unique functionality.
There more then one way to do it :)
-Corwin
-Original Message-
From: Peter Scott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
or even the cooler
throw Exception::MyDB "ABC.1234" => "Some message about what went
wrong"
O! I like that! I guess I might come to love C after all.
I think it would be best to supply a reference. This
-Original Message-
From: David L. Nicol [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
How about
%students : ( sort = $$students{^1}{GPA} <=> $$students{^0}{GPA} });
O, this is cool.
-Original Message-
my %students : sorted( $ME{^1}{GPA} <=> $ME{^0}{GPA} );
And th
Hmm this gets me thinking:
-Original Message-
From: Tony Olekshy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Or, with try/catch...
sub openrecord
{
for (my $attempt = 0; $attempt < 5; ++$attempt) {
my $fileName = &GetRecordFileName;
try { open REC, $fileName; }
-Original Message-
From: Barrie Slaymaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> It basically allows the programmer to "try" a certain action and see what
the
>> effects are going to be (i.e. handle the exception) so that some action
can
>> then be taken based on the r
-Original Message-
From: Barrie Slaymaker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> It basically allows the programmer to "try" a certain action and see what
the
>> effects are going to be (i.e. handle the exception) so that some action
can
>> then be taken based on the r
17 matches
Mail list logo
