On Mon 21 Jan 2002 19:25, Simon Glover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2002, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>
> > perl vtable_h.pl
> > make: *** No rule to make target `include/parrot/rxstacks.h', needed by
>`test_main.o'. Stop.
>
> This exists (and has done for a couple of days) but
l1:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot-current 114 > perl Configure.pl --default
Parrot Version 0.0.3 Configure
Copyright (C) 2001-2002 Yet Another Society
Since you're running this script, you obviously have
Perl 5--I'll be pulling some defaults from its configuration.
Checking the MANIFEST to make sure you h
HP-UX is very unwilling at this stage, including two show-stoppers
1. The LDFLAGS is extended with flags from config that are meant to be passed
to cc, not to ld
2. Undefined symbols inhibit the basic build
a5:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot-current 101 > perl Configure.pl --default
Parrot Version 0.0.3
Changed 'make parrot' to 'make'
cc -DDEBUGGING -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -I/pro/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64-I./include -o interpreter.o -c interpreter.c
cc: "interpreter.c", line 160: warning 604: Pointers are not assignment-compatible.
and - for the smokes - please
# perl configure --default
:
:
Okay, we're done!
You can now use `make parrot' (or your platform's equivalent to `make')
to build your Parrot.
Happy Hacking,
The Parrot Team
l1:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot-current 104 > make parrot
perl vtable_h.pl
cc -DDEBUGGING -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -I/pro/local/i
I will not post these until status changes in order not to clutter the list.
Assume succes on HP-UX 11.00 until a report proves different.
Automated smoke report for patch Dec 6 20:00:01 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended
Automated smoke report for patch Dec 3 20:00:03 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = m
Automated smoke report for patch Dec 1 20:00:02 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = m
Automated smoke report for patch Dec 2 20:00:02 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = m
--- Original Message ---
From:"H.M. Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:Thu, 29 Nov 2001 23:02:10 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Parrot Smoke Nov 29 20:00:01 2001 UTC hpux 11.00
Automated smoke report for patch Nov 29 20:00:01 2001
--- Original Message ---
From:"H.M. Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:Wed, 28 Nov 2001 23:03:45 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Parrot Smoke Nov 28 20:00:02 2001 UTC hpux 11.00
Automated smoke report for patch Nov 28 20:00:02 2001
On Wed 28 Nov 2001 17:43, Michael Maraist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> While your point is taken, it's hardly considered "C++" anymore. Many
> C-compilers have adopted many such useful features.
True, but many also have not. Try to program defensive, one might want to
compile it on a cray tha
*** PLEASE WRITE PORTABLE CODE, NOT ALL THE WORLD USES GCC ***
ibm:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot-current 102 > perl Configure.pl --default
Parrot Configure
Copyright (C) 2001 Yet Another Society
Since you're running this script, you obviously have
Perl 5--I'll be pulling some defaults from its configurat
# perl Configure.pl --default
:
:
Okay, that's finished. I'm now going to write your very
own Makefile, config.h, Parrot::Types, and Parrot::Config to disk.
Alright, now I'm gonna check some stuff by compiling and running
another small C program. This could take a bit...
"./include/parrot/vtab
cc -DDEBUGGING +DAportable -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -I/pro/local/include \
-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I./include \
-o platform.o -c platform.c
cpp: "platform.c", line 6: error 4036: Can't open include file 'dlfcn.h'.
make: *** [platform.o] Error 1
--
H.Merijn Brand
Automated smoke report for patch Nov 28 08:00:01 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux - 11.00 using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = m
Since reports were pretty discouraging, just looked into the log again
1. Could you consider *not* throwing away 'mktest.???' on make distclean?
for the moment, I've changed the mktest.pl to redirect the test output
to the smoke directory, and changed mkovz.pl to get it there.
2. Where
--- Original Message ---
From:"H.M. Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:Sun, 11 Nov 2001 22:57:12 +0100 (MET)
Subject: Parrot Smoke Nov 11 20:00:01 2001 UTC hpux 11.00
Automated smoke report for patch Nov 11 20:00:01 2001
Automated smoke report for patch Nov 8 20:00:00 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = make, t =
Automated smoke report for patch Nov 7 20:00:02 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = make, t =
Automated smoke report for patch Oct 30 20:02:18 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = make, t =
Automated smoke report for patch Oct 28 20:00:01 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Configure, m = make, t =
l1:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot-current 102 > make distclean
perl -MExtUtils::Manifest=filecheck -le 'xtUtils::Manifest::Quiet=1;unlink for
filecheck()'
Undefined subroutine &xtUtils::Manifest::Quiet called at -e line 1.
make: *** [distclean] Error 255
l1:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot-current 103 > rm -f *.o *.a
Last success was
Automated smoke report for patch Oct 20 19:00:01 2001 UTC
v0.02 on hpux using cc version B.11.11.02
O = OK
F = Failure(s), extended report at the bottom
? = still running or test results not (yet) available
Build failures during: - = unknown
c = Config
On Tue 23 Oct 2001 14:51, Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 08:39:29 -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
>
> >As one of the few rabid Mac users on this list, let me just say that I
> >personally have no problem with classic Mac OS support being totally dropped
> >from Parrot if
On Wed 19 Sep 2001 13:10, "H.Merijn Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And, maybe even more important, not all the world has gcc!
and bytecode.c
l1:/pro/3gl/CPAN/parrot 136 > make test_prog
cc -DDEBUGGING -Ae -D_HPUX_SOURCE -I/pro/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FI
LE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -I..
On Wed 19 Sep 2001 11:15, "H.Merijn Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue 18 Sep 2001 20:43, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Okay, folks, the following platforms are considered core for the parrot
> > interpreter. That means we need to run on all of them for any release of
> > t
On Tue 18 Sep 2001 10:52, Mattia Barbon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>
> >On Mon 17 Sep 2001 23:08, Ask Bjoern Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> oops, I forgot to tell anyone. I made CVS export and tar up a
> >> snapshot every 6 hours. It is
On Mon 17 Sep 2001 16:43, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2001 at 04:46:30PM +0200, H. Merijn Brand wrote:
> > Can't locate Digest/MD5.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /pro/lib/perl5/5.6.1/PA-RISC2.0
>/pro/lib/perl5/5.6.1 /pro/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.
On Mon 17 Sep 2001 16:16, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That could be because these aren't in the MANIFEST, so didn't get
> included in the parrot-nightly tarball. I'll fix up the MANIFEST
> and try another tarball so that it builds here.
>
> In fact, try downloading it now.
Okay, th
I've waited till either Configure or make would do something sensible, and I'm
also aware that parrot-nightly isn't stable. Does perl6-internals value input
like this (on a regular basis) or not.
Either way, is there a point in time that parrot is released as pseodo-stable
snapshots like Jarkko d
On Wed 12 Sep 2001 13:23, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can we usefully smoke parrots yet?
> Or is this something that someone (Schwern?) is working on?
>
> [in that as all the world is not a vax^Wx86 it would be useful to smoke on
> "obscure" architectures that SIGBUS on unaligned
On Tue 11 Sep 2001 01:35, Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, I'm still interested. Don't know how much I'll have time,
> though, (even after 5.8.0, that is). But I guess (together with Andy)
> we can at least tell horror stories about all the possible ways of how
> *not* to do i
On Fri 11 May 2001 16:31, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2001 at 01:55:42AM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
> > On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 07:40:04PM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > By far most of my use of typeglobs is making aliases, and then mostly
> > > for code:
>
On Tue 14 Aug 2001 00:55, "Espen Harlinn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pardon me for butting in at this late stage :-)
>
> Since the purpose of coding conventions and guidelines is to make code more
> readable to the majority of developers, wouldn't it make sence to settle on
> something that can
On Wed 30 May 2001 16:37, Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 04:23 PM 5/30/2001 +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> >But I know I'm rather alone on this, though I'm not just someone saying:
> >"Cause that looks nice". I have several reasons for dong so and can defend
> >my stance.
>
> Just
On Wed 30 May 2001 16:29, Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 04:23:58PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > On Wed 30 May 2001 16:12, Dave Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:::
> > But I know I'm rather alone on this, though I'm not just someone saying: "Cause
> > that
On Wed 30 May 2001 16:12, Dave Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "K&R" style for indenting control constructs: ie the closing C<}> should
> > > line up with the opening C etc.
> > >
> > > =item *
> > >
> > > When a conditional spans multiple lines, the opening brace must line up
> > > wi
On Tue 29 May 2001 19:25, Dave Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> =head2 Portability
>
> Related to extensibility is portability. Perl runs on many, many
> platforms, and will no doubt be ported to ever more bizarre and obscure
> ones over time. You should never assume an operating system, pr
On Tue 29 May 2001 19:25, Dave Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> =item *
>
> "K&R" style for indenting control constructs: ie the closing C<}> should
> line up with the opening C etc.
>
> =item *
>
> When a conditional spans multiple lines, the opening brace must line up
> with the "if" or
On Thu 17 May 2001 00:33, Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2) If the language is so big that you can't hold all of its
> > features in your head, then those extra features might as well not
> > exist.
>
> I disagree. I don't hold all of perl5 in my head. Formats? They're
>
On Wed, 2 May 2001 08:05:29 -0700 (PDT), Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Michael G Schwern writes:
> : (grep {...} @stuff)[0] will work, but its inelegant.
>
> It's inelegant only because the slice doesn't know how to tell the
> iterator it only needs one value. If it did know, you'd cal
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 14:57:50 +0200, Davíð Helgason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "H.Merijn Brand" wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:22:54 +0100, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > If postfix "!" was up for grabs - which it probably isn't - what would
> > > you do with it?
> > >
> >
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:02:50 +0100, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 01:49:36PM +0200, Dav?? Helgason wrote:
> > This wouldn't mean that anyone is thinking of getting us object
> > dot-syntax, now would it?
>
>
>
> > After giving it a thought, it seems that it
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:22:54 +0100, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If postfix "!" was up for grabs - which it probably isn't - what would
> you do with it?
>
> One interesting suggestion was to have it as a shorthand for assertion:
>
> sub foo {
> (@_ > 0)!;
> ...
> }
>
> (Or
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 13:19:24 +0100, Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > $a = $b ~ $c; # Mmm!
> >
> > I like that last one a lot, because it doesn't disturb anything.
> > You'd have to alter ~'s precedence so that binary ~ is higher
> > than named unary operators. (It's print($a~$b), not pr
On Mon, 16 Apr 2001 10:29:41 PDT, Jeff Okamoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The
> > timescales of corporations like Sun are not the same as those commonly
> > encountered in the open software arena.
>
> Ditto for HP.
Which is more extreme (HP9000/L1000, HP-UX 11.00 + March 2001 patches):
% /u
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 06:53:49 +0200, Otto Wyss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > - Make readability your main objective. Readability is possibly the
> > weakest part of Perl.
> >
> > - Keep your eyes on modularity. Modularity is by far the best concept
> > where complexity could be hidden.
> >
>
On Fri, 23 Mar 2001 23:34:41 +0100, Otto Wyss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A study in Science (291 P.2165) found out that english speaking children
> has twice as much reading problems as italian speaking children of the
> same age. And about similar difference towards german and french. This
> co
On Mon, 19 Feb 2001 08:49:04 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 03:47:12PM +0100, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > As an active non-smoker, I'd appreciate a different name.
>
> Likewise. What's wrong with builders?
Same here. Testers?
--
H.Merijn Brand
On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:44:38 +, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I was being serious. But first, a plea:
>
> This is much harder than doing the Perl 5 summaries, because I have to
> watch over a lot more things. I'd appreciate some help; if you feel this
> is a useful exercise and yo
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:23:52 +, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 09:57:13AM -0500, Kirrily Skud Robert wrote:
> > Would anyone like to volunteer to do weekly summaries
>
> Well, don't forget that I *do* have people helping me out with the weekly
> summaries.
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 15:05:55 +, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 03:33:39PM +0100, H . Merijn Brand wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:17:30 -0500, Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > > http://www.nytimes.com/2001/0
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 09:17:30 -0500, Joshua N Pritikin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/07/science/07reuters-camel.html
Which is of no use if you don't have a subscriber ID (and do not want to have
one) to th NYT, since it is quite useless in europe ...
--
H.Merijn Bran
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:05:46 -0600, Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2001 at 05:55:13PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> >Never over-design. Never think "Hmm, maybe somebody would find this
> >useful". Start from what you know people _have_ to have, and try to
> >
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 15:27:28 -0500, "Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apprentice Tasks
>
> Any task vaguely Perl related can be apprenticed out. Here is a sample
> list:
>
> - Documentation, both internal and external, including, for instance,
> programming guides, DDDs, user docum
I'm neither interested in python, nor in OO-programming, so don't copy me in on
replies like you did with my ruby announcement, which you seemed to like.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: fm.announce
Subject: Python 2.0c1 - High-level scripting language.
Date: 10 Oct 2000 17:42:12 GMT
applica
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:23:32 +0100, Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, some of you may have noticed that I've suddenly started writing one or
> two little RFCs. Yes, this is really me, the same guy who was convinced that
> Perl 6 was an exercise in how quick we could all go to hell in
On 27 Sep 2000 07:36:42 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> First-Class CGI Support
Freezing within two days doesn't leave much space for comments and or
objections does it?
I'
On 20 Sep 2000 04:12:09 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Add null() keyword and fundamental data type
>
> =head1 MIGRATION
>
> None. New functionality.
Not true. Apart from the discussion if undef is the same as null, in which I
take no stance, Migration
On 19 Sep 2000 09:23:00 +0300, Ariel Scolnicov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm planning to withdraw RFC184 ("Perl should support an interactive
> mode"), due to lack of interest. There was little discussion of it,
> and the consensus seemed to be that C is "good enough" for
> most purposes, a
I don't like OOP, you folks obviously do. Maybe docs/specs/... are interesting
for you ...
Have fun.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: fm.announce
Subject: Ruby 1.6.0 - An object-oriented language for quick and easy programming
Date: 19 Sep 2000 09:58:15 GMT
application: Ruby 1.6.0
aut
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 08:43:05 -0600, Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do not think you two are arguing about the same thing.
>
> Certainly as Bart has shown, formats *can* see lexicals. Your
> illustration does not disprove that. It simply shows that lexical
> scoping is static sc
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 13:49:25 +0200, Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 10:57:49 +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
>
> >perl5 formats do NOT support lexicals
>
> Eh? It looks like it, though.
>
> my $foo;
> format STDOUT =
> @>>>
> $foo
> .
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 01:22:31 -0600, Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Surely the next request will be to make anything that works outside
> of quotes work inside of them, completely erasing the useful visual
> distinction. Why should operators, after all, be any different
> from funct
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 20:13:34 -0700, Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I loathe the indirect object syntax.
>
> Well that makes one of us! ;-)
>
> > Easy. Put them in a subroutine:
> >
> > sub format1 { format $template1, @data };
> > sub format2 { print STDERR format $
On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 12:41:04 -0700, Glenn Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) do perl6 formats need to have exactly the same scoping rules as perl5
> formats in this regard?
perl5 formats do NOT support lexicals, so this is not a very interesting
question. (Re-)implementation of formats in
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:58:51 -0400, John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > Are we being clever again?
> > Rephrase: "No empty lines".
> > I know you understood, but ... (no, I won't say it)
>
> Frankly, I thought it was absurd when I first wrote it...
> but then I look
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000 10:19:38 -0400, John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > On 13 Sep 2000 07:18:15 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> > > http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
> > >
> > > =head1 TITLE
> >
On 13 Sep 2000 07:18:15 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> POD should tolerate white space.
I don't want any newlines needed at all, though I think I stand somewhat alone
here.
On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 13:44:10 +0200, "H.Merijn Brand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having no time to write and/or maintain RFC's, I'll toss this up in the air
> and see what happens.
[ snip ]
> my $Ycmp = sub { $a cmp $b };
> @a = sort $Ycmp @x;
>
> but this is an unsupported syntax
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 16:41:41 -0600, Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've actually even used this at run-time, such as:
>
> $value = {
> azure => 0xF0,
> chartreuse => 0x7FFF00,
> lavender=> 0xE6E6FA,
> magenta => 0xFF00FF,
> turqu
Having no time to write and/or maintain RFC's, I'll toss this up in the air
and see what happens.
Abigail has posted sorting benchmarks for 5.6.0 to 5.7.0 on clp.misc, and I've
extended that being curious to performance loss for anonymous blocks and named
subroutines
sub Xcmp { $a cmp $b
On 4 Sep 2000 21:32:00 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1TITLE
>
> Here Docs Terminators (Was Whitespace and Here Docs)
[...]
> =head1 IMPLENTATION
Intentional? It's either 'IMPL
Why private and not on perl6?
Posted this to both, hope you don't care.
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 13:11:53 +0200 (CEST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Johan Vromans)
wrote:
> [Quoting H.Merijn Brand, on September 1 2000, 11:02, in "Re: RFC 181 (v1) For"]
> > > Is there any reason left to maintain formats as somet
On 31 Aug 2000 06:28:10 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Being one of world's active format users, I have to comment.
> Formats out of core / New format syntax
> Currently, the general consensus is that formats aren't widely used
> enough to justify their living in the core
76 matches
Mail list logo
