It's pretty modular already; only a little more work would be needed to have it
loaded as an external module.
On Tue, 30 May 2017 12:34:08 -0400
Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The REPL's almost an independent project.
>
> Can it be made modular, to reduce the coupling between it an
, manipulating global
variables in native code wasn't possible, but
maybe that's changed in the last year or so!
As I said above, the completions offered are pretty limited - if you would like
to extend the completions capabilities of the REPL,
you can change the Completions role in src/core/REPL
On 2017-05-01 01:38:14, c...@zoffix.com wrote:
> > On 23 Jun 2015, at 15:37, Rob Hoelz (via RT) > follo...@perl.org> wrote:
> > Unlinking a non-existent file should fail() rather than return True.
>
> The end-goal of .unlinking stuff is for the file to stop existing.
>
FWIW, 141 is SIGPIPE. (signal 13 + WIFSIGNALED flag (128))
So something's happening in your RUN script that's causing it to write to a
closed pipe. I hope this helps!
-Rob
On Mon, 27 Mar 2017 11:51:03 +0300
Gabor Szabo wrote:
> Putting
>
> CATCH { default { put
On Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:30:28 -0700
Alex Elsayed wrote:
> On Wednesday, 7 September 2016 17:57:32 PDT Parrot Raiser wrote:
> > This isn't a request for a feature, merely a thought experiment.
> > We're still in the phase where it's more important to ensure that
> > existing features work properly
mboy64,
Moritz Lenz, Altai-man, Rob Hoelz, Zoffix Znet, Salvador Ortiz, Tom Browder,
Ahmad M. Zawawi, Xliff, Matt Oates, Nick Logan, Jonathan Stowe
If you would like to contribute or find out more information, visit
<http://perl6.org>, <http://rakudo.org/how-to-help>, ask on the
treated as single entries in the command history.
Thanks!
-Rob
ld
technically depend on introspection of the signature returning Any in
this case, would we be hesitant to change the behavior?
Thanks,
Rob
the deprecated code incrementally. I think removing
about six a day should do the trick for the release on the 17th.
What does everyone think of this idea? We can perform the work in a
branch if we want to keep (nom&glr) backwards compatible until we
throw the switch.
-Rob
gt; regards
> Gabor
Hi Gabor,
I believe that http://testers.p6c.org/ is written in Perl 6
(https://github.com/perl6/cpandatesters.perl6.org)
Are you going to put your talk online? I'm sure a bunch of Perl 6ers
(myself included) would be happy to see it!
-Rob
ollowing people contributed to this release:
Elizabeth Mattijsen, Tobias Leich, Jonathan Worthington, Timo Paulssen,
Rob Hoelz, Christian Bartolomäus, Will "Coke" Coleda, Bart Wiegmans,
Larry Wall, Moritz Lenz, Justin DeVuyst, Steve Mynott, Carl Masak,
Solomon Foster, cygx, smls, Alexa
On Fri May 29 06:23:54 2015, r...@hoelz.ro wrote:
> On Fri May 29 05:54:10 2015, r...@hoelz.ro wrote:
> > On Wed May 13 16:38:02 2015, rjbs wrote:
> > > A buf is supposed to be mutable, but I can't push to it. TimToday++
> > > said this
> > > was incorrect behavior and just NYI.
> > >
> > > ~$ pe
On Fri May 29 05:54:10 2015, r...@hoelz.ro wrote:
> On Wed May 13 16:38:02 2015, rjbs wrote:
> > A buf is supposed to be mutable, but I can't push to it. TimToday++
> > said this
> > was incorrect behavior and just NYI.
> >
> > ~$ perl6 -e 'my $b = Buf.new(1,2,3); $b.push(4)'
> > Cannot call push
On Wed May 13 16:38:02 2015, rjbs wrote:
> A buf is supposed to be mutable, but I can't push to it. TimToday++
> said this
> was incorrect behavior and just NYI.
>
> ~$ perl6 -e 'my $b = Buf.new(1,2,3); $b.push(4)'
> Cannot call push(Buf: Int); none of these signatures match:
> (Any:U \SELF:
Yup, PERL6LIB. =)
On Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:03:05 -0500
Tom Browder wrote:
> I would like an easy way to have a local search path for local Perl 6
> modules (those not installed via Panda).
>
> I'm used to using the environment variable PERL5LIB for Perl 5
> modules. Is there currently any equiva
6" is now deprecated:
https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/b7196bd
-Rob
On Sun, 2 Mar 2014 02:02:36 -0800
"Tobias Leich via RT" wrote:
> Am Fr 21. Feb 2014, 17:20:53, r...@hoelz.ro schrieb:
> > I've attached a sample tarball of code; use ufo, make, and perl6
> > test.p6 to run it. A more real-world example is the URI module.
>
> The weird thing is that accessing th
I should also mention that while this form produces the bug:
regex foo { { say($) } }
This form does not:
$s ~~ / { say($) } }/
On 3/5/13 11:44 AM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 11:13:51AM +0100, Rob Hoelz wrote:
>> I already have my own package for Arch Linux for Rakudo Star, and I keep
>> the OS X homebrew package up-to-date as well. I'd like to create an RPM
>> spec f
all"), but the former is probably a little
harder to do.
-Rob
erl6', or if 'use v6' is found. This
can be improved.
* Speed improvement. I haven't put any time into optimization, and
this can likely be improved.
If you find any bugs, or better yet, if you have any improvements to
submit, please let me know!
-Rob
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
I submitted these patches over a year ago...are they even relevant
anymore?
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:51:12 -0700
"Will Coleda via RT" wrote:
> On Sat Jul 25 17:20:40 2009, hoelzro wrote:
> > See the patches' summaries for details.
>
> Sorry for the delay in responding, but these patches no longer
# New Ticket Created by "Rob West"
# Please include the string: [perl #46473]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=46473 >
This patch should make it so that the NOTNULL macro will work as
expected f
I see that there's work being done on a perl6 implementation under
languages in parrot. How is this effort related to the pugs
project? Is the aim of this to provide an alternative implementation
of perl6 to pugs? Is one of them the destined to be the canonical
implementation, or is the
On 5/15/06, Audrey Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Rob Kinyon wrote:
> I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be very feasible to do this natively in
> P5. But, would it be possible to do it natively in P6? As in,
> supported within the interpreter vs. through some sort of overloa
do it natively in P6? As in,
supported within the interpreter vs. through some sort of overloading.
Rob
od a(::CLASS $self) from each role being
excluded or are all the multimethod a(...)'s being excluded?
Rob
;
> }
> }
How about just inheriting from Hash?
class Gollum extends Hash;
method postcircumfix:<{}> (Golum $self, Any $key, Any $value) {
die "Nasssty Hobbitses" if $value.does(Hobbit);
$self.NEXT.{}( $key, $value );
}
Rob
dd Hash-like behavior to something that already has a
postcircumfix<{}> because it probably has that behavior already.
Rob
On 1/25/06, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud skribis 2006-01-25 13:47 (-0600):
> > On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 11:37:42AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> > > I've changed the flipflop operator/macro to "ff", short for "flipflop".
> > > This has several benefits. ...
> > ...another of w
On 1/20/06, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 04:20:54PM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
> > Pros: Larry doesn't have to do anything more on the WMoT.
> > Cons: The community, for some reason, really wants this
> > auto-translat
unity to provide a translator
for each of those. Then, use #2 for the others.
Pros: The WMoT can punt in about half the cases.
Cons: The WMoT cannot punt in about half the cases.
Rob
On 1/19/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 19 January 2006 19:50, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > Nothing. Just like it's not a problem if Perl6 uses one of the
> > Ruby-specific PMCs for storage. In fact, the alternate $repr idea is
> > specifica
oned in this thread, like overlapping
> methods.
Yeah it does because all $repr's are p6opaque with direct access being
converted into attribute access. No method overlap.
Rob
On 1/19/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 20:02, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > On 1/18/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > Answer me this then -- under your scheme, can I subclass a Perl 5 class
> > > with P
On 1/19/06, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-19 16:10 (-0500):
> > There are no references in Perl6.
> I have to admit, though, that I've never seen this statement, or
> anything implying it. It's entirely new to me.
>
> Is your Per
&bless was a brilliant idea for Perl5. It's wrong for Perl6.
Rob
ull form everywhere). However, the underlying type
system will only consider the structure of the type when doing its
job."
What's wrong with Perl doing things that way? duck-typing with names
... sounds like a plan to me ...
Rob
On 1/19/06, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob Kinyon skribis 2006-01-18 20:57 (-0500):
> > Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
>
> Nonsense. OO isn't a set of features, and OO isn't syntax.
>
> Granted, syntax can really help to unde
rue NEXT semantics, and the ability to
completely rewrite the method dispatcher (if you really feel like it).
I think we've gone well beyond &bless.
Rob
On 1/18/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:39, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > No, you want to specify the $repr in CREATE(). But, p6hash will still
> > not be the same as a ref to an HV. Frankly, I think you're better off
> > let
Perl5 and Python. Worrying about it in userland is just going
to cause you headaches.
Rob
On 1/18/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 19:11, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > As for how that will be handled, I would think that it would be as follows:
> > - in Perl6, objects created in another language will be treated as
> &g
On 1/18/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 January 2006 17:57, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > Well, for one thing, you can't write OO code in P5.
>
> I'll play your semantic game if you play my what-if game.
>
> I have a fair bit of Perl 5 c
TOLOAD (or method_missing
or whatever) to check .blessed_into and try that package, if one is
set.
Also, given that the semantics of a number of items is changing (
"".split(':') anyone?), how closely will P6 really mirror P5 behavior
given identical code?
Rob
On 1/18/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 01:56:53PM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
> : Today on #perl6, Audrey, Stevan and I were talking about $repr. A
> : tangent arose where Audrey said that the difference between class
> : methods and instance
-intuitive.
I think that class methods should be explicitly defined as class
methods and you cannot call a class method upon an instance, just as
you cannot call an instance method upon a class. Plus, this should be
determinable (for the most part) at compile time, which is a bonus,
imho.
Thanks,
Rob
int of boxing to provide a hardware-independent dependable
solution at the cost of additional cycles?
Rob
al" issues where it might or might not reference $x. I'm okay
> with requiring lexical scopes to have some existing relationship
> with dynamic scopes, especially when we know some initialization is
> required.
What other forms would be useful other than "our sub g {...}"? If
they're useful, shouldn't they have keywords?
Rob
@_[0] + 1 } and a prev of { @_[0] - 1 } (boundschecking against the
limits of the type, of course) ... ?
That sounds reasonable and dwimmish to me.
Rob
And it just DWIM for numbers like 1.2 ( -> 2.2). If Real is what 1.2
is implicitly coerced into, what do I do now?
Remeber a few truisms:
* The most common usage of Perl after bad CGIs is systems administration.
* The most powerful feature of Perl for sysadmins is the scalar
Rob
true, then $x > $y is false. Otherwise,
the definitions of <= and > have been violated.
And, if I can't put them in a <=, then Perl should complain very
loudly, just as if I put something else that shouldn't be put into <=,
like a Person object. If I call min() or min2() with a Person object
and an array, I should expect loud complaints from the runtime. If a
junction cannot behave itself in a numeric comparison, then similar
complaints should be made.
Rob
ted given the possibility of tying
variables (or is this a Perl5ism that is being discarded in Perl6?)
Rob
py list of arrays' or 'the rest
> of the arguments, without flattening'. If I *really* want aggressive
> flattening then I can call, say, @slurpy_param.flatten
Does this imply that [EMAIL PROTECTED] === @slurpy.flatten ?
Or, put another way, can't we just say that prefixed * is symbolic
notation for flatten() in the same way that postfixed [] is symbolic
notation for slice()?
Rob
On 12/27/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:10:45AM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
> : Creating an array whose positions are aliases for positions in another
> : array can be useful. How about
> :
> : my @s := @a[0,2,4] is alias;
> :
&
rray can be useful. How about
my @s := @a[0,2,4] is alias;
@a[2] = 3; # @s[1] == 3
@s[1] = 4; # @a[2] == 4
The default slicing behavior would default to "is copy", to preserve
the current semantics. Does that sound reasonable?
Rob
Of course, this doesn't work for arbitrary complex structures, but I
don't think anything would work for those.
Rob
quot;This should print out." }
I'm not sure that works with the Principle of Least Surprise. While I
cannot say what it is, you're saying that I can now say what it isn't.
While that follows from typing, that doesn't follow from the common
understanding of undef.
Rob
as for people that like to turn
> strictures or warnings off, I suggest that there can be an optional
> feature, perhaps a pragma or better a core module, where a developer
> can say that they want undefs to automatically become zero in numeric
> contexts or an empty string in string contexts, or false in boolean
> contexts, etc. But they should have to explicitly activate that
> feature, like saying "treat undef as 0 in all my code", and this
> treating would not happen by default.
No - a stricture. :-)
Rob
ason than
> to cast a string to your new data type. Otherwise, your data types
> would only be constants because you would have no way of assigning a
> value.
Fair enough. One would need to be able to convert back and forth
between the base type (Int, String, etc) and the type.
Rob
On 12/16/05, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As for the syntactic sugar, I'm not quite sure what should be
> > done here. And, with macros, it's not clear that there needs
> > to be an authoritative ans
ring thoughts. Bonus points to whomever
can help me bridge the gap between what I just blathered and an
elegant solution to Sudoku.
Rob
On 12/8/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip] Certainly, as you speculate, if different authors want
> to share an API, they can give it an "API" author that knows how to
> delegate to one of the authors.
Would you mind elaborating on this some more?
Thanks,
Rob
was amenable to parsing by Perl 6 rules (with a little help from a
> bottom-up operator-precedence expression parser.)
Once Patrick is done with PGE, will it be able to parse Perl5? If so,
why aren't we focusing on that?
Rob
grant ( Sub, Var, [Var, ... ] )
revoke( Sub, Var, [Var, ... ] )
It is an error to:
* attempt to grant/revoke access to a variable you don't have access to
* attempt to grant/revoke access to a variable that isn't in scope for
the grantee
Thanks,
Rob
On 11/23/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : I'm also puzzled that you feel the need to write 0..$n-1 so often; there
> : are so many alternatives to fenceposting in P5 that I almost never write
> : an expression like that, so why is it cropping up that much in P6?
>
> Couple reasons occu
could potentially do different things, including possibly run out of
memory in some cases. Plus, what if the @list isn't lazy?
Better, I think, would be:
say substr( ~(1..Inf) is lazy, 0, 10 );
Or, have substr()'s signature be:
sub substr( Str $str is rw is lazy, Int $start, Int $?end, Int $?replacement );
Rob
>
> Flattened lists would still loop forever (or fail):
>
> say **(1..Inf);
>
> $s = substr( ~( **(1..Inf) ), 0, 10 );
This would work, I think, if ranges were convertable to iterators,
stringification was lazy, and substr() informed the stringification of
how much it needed to do. I'm not sure how feasible that last one is
...
Rob
On 11/23/05, Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/23/05, Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 11/22/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > for ^5 { say } # 0, 1, 2, 3, 4
> >
> > I read this and I
d be -1 (under 2's complement) and ^1 would
be -2. I'm not sure where this would be useful, but that's what comes
to mind when discussing a unary ^.
Thanks,
Rob
" and ".".
The key would be that the $actions arrayref would get push'ed/pop'ed
as you enter/leave a given lexical scope.
Obviously, this could be optimized to an extremely large degree, but
it -should- work.
Rob
}
>
> # for restored, as the modified for went out of scope:
> for -> $item { say $item }
> # "a\nb\nc\n"
Is there a list of the statement control items that are implemented as
such vs. implemented in another way?
Thanks,
Rob
of a string modify
the original?
Rob
hat for all b in N, b != 1, there is a unique
predecessor. If we have that, then we get the laws of arithmetic. Is
it possible to put that into the type inferencer if the types are
defined as iterators? Kind of like Church numbers, but in P6 notation.
I think that by defining our types as iterators, we can satisfy the
succ/pred requirements of Peano's, meaning we have the arithmetic
rules.
Rob
angeable).
And, if you pass (1..Inf) to map/grep/sort, it would HAVE to return an
iterator back, otherwise you'll hang at that instruction.
Of course, if you said "while (my $n = 1..Inf) { }", it's on your head
to provide a "last" in there somewhere.
Rob
> But if we have a mandatory type inferencer underneath that is merely
> ignored when it's inconvenient, then we could probably automatically
> delay evaluation of the code. . . .
I'm not so certain that ignoring the mandatory type inferencer is a
good idea, even when it's inconvenient. I don'
here immediately springs into being
> a Dog role empty of everything but the expectation that whatever does
> that role provides everything publicly accessible that an instance of
> the Dog class does.
In other words, a role is just a closed class and a class is just an
open role? Larry stipulated this about a month ago.
Rob
; );
>
> Try that...
Well... I don't know if your conjecture is true, but your suggestion
worked like a charm. Thanks! (and now I'm on my way to reorganize my
other distribution...)
L8r,
Rob
what I named above and the *~ backup files that emacs
creates.
Still no luck. I type make, I get pm_to_blib and blib/* skeleton but my
files don't get copied into blib.
Since I don't think I'm stupid, but I'm willing to admit ignorance:
WTF??? What did I miss here??
TIA!
L8r,
Rob
FAR outweigh any
additional complexity. Ruby could benefit from this, too. (While
first-class blocks rock my world, the weird subroutine signature stuff
most certainly doesn't.)
Rob
On 11/7/05, Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > So, for a bit of extra complexity, I get peace of mind for myself and my
> > users.
>
> The point being, and I'm stressing it once again but no more than once,
&g
perspective. Almost makes me wonder how much
trouble it would be to implement this in P5 ...
Rob
re the reasons that they should or shouldn't?
I say no. It goes back to does a role provide a list of function names
with possible default implementations or does it provide a behavior
that is supported by a set of related functions that one can override,
if desired. What you're proposing assumes that roles are nothing more
than jazzed up Java interfaces. I would hate to see that happen. So, I
say that it should be the latter.
Rob
oo} = 3; The problem is with the
subroutines that aren't real methods with correct protection
mechanisms.
So, for a bit of extra complexity, I get peace of mind for myself and my users.
(Oh, and Ruby has first-class block. W00T!)
Rob
rl6 allows
assignment to be overloaded like Ruby does. If it does, then the two
expressions aren't guaranteed to be identical as they are now in
Perl5.
Rob
should be able to freely
> disambiguate or override using anything it want's to. It need not be
> related at all to it's subroles.
To further expand on this, D's disambiguation of method foo() could be:
role D does C { method foo() { Completely::Unrelated::foo() } }
Rob
n, if you use a grammar extension, ALL bets are off within
that scope until you've read the documentation. Literally anything and
everything can happen, if the author deemed it so. It's a source
filter-like construct that doesn't suck because source filter-like
constructs are part of the spec.
Rob
is just a Perl-ism. The
PoLS doesn't apply.
Yes, from a consistency point of view, ALL operators should default to
$_ or some other sensible item ($*STDIN for <>, etc). However, the
PoLS does need to guide our decisions.
Rob
On 11/1/05, Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rob Kinyon wrote:
> > > 1. choose one of a set of available methods to call its own.
> > > 2. create a version of its own.
> > > 3. pass the buck.
> >
> > #1 and #2 are identical. Stevan and I h
ll be some sugar to allow #1 to be its own syntax, but it
should be viewed as a #2.
Rob
d on the fact that classA does
roleAB means something in terms of the functionality that classA
provides to me. I don't want it to be a glorified can() check. That
does no-one any good.
Rob
vate concept that C++
has. (I don't agree with the protected concept, but private vs. public
is good.)
Doing it any other way leads to the following: if A does rA and B isa
A and B defines an attribute that conflicts with the one provided by
rA, how on earth is that supposed to be detected? Especially given
that the inheritance tree of a class can be modified at runtime.
Rob
> But IMHO the reduction in typing for this relatively minor issue is not
> really worth the surprise to newbies at seeing operandless operators.
AMEN!
Rob
On 10/27/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 05:37:13AM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
> : Will I be able to do something like:
> :
> : package Foo;
>
> Hmm, you just started in Perl 5 mode.
>
> : $*VERSION = 1.3.2;
>
> Perl 5 would
ou say something
"won't play in Peoria", you're saying that it's unlikely to be
accepted by the masses.
Rob
On 10/26/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:35:05PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> : On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 21:58 -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
> :
> : > Plus, the argument is a straw man. Instead of:
> : >
> : > class Some::Class is a
n other words, it can cache all the method
lookups at compile-time. That's a substantial savings. If they're open
classes, the runtime has to throw out all the cached lookups the
moment any of the classes upstream are modified.
Plus, the argument is a straw man. Instead of:
class Some::Class is also {
}
you would do:
class My::Version {
does Some::Class;
}
Problem solved.
Rob
On 10/26/05, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 20:29 -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
>
> > I would prefer to use roles as they're closed by default, leaving
> > "class" to be my powertool, if I need the power.
>
> I don't unde
to create immutable
classes? Given that roles and classes now seem to differ only in their
mutability, I can't see a reason why I would use class as my default
object definer. I would prefer to use roles as they're closed by
default, leaving "class" to be my powertool, if I need the power.
Rob
all of this? I hope it's not
through repeated eigenclasses (or whatever they're called this week)
... that just sounds too heavy.
2) Isn't Dog|Cat kinda declaring a kind? Thus, can't you say "my
Dog|Cat $catdog;" and be talking about a kind? I would think that a
"named kind" is just a role ...
3) Aren't classes mutable and roles immutable by default only? Or has
this changed?
Rob
1 - 100 of 184 matches
Mail list logo
