On Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> Sean O'Rourke:
> # > # 4 - the other arrays boosted to the highest dimension
> # > It's already been defined to be #4.
> #
> # Argh. Then I need to whinge a bit -- what if it's a ragged
> # array? What if different elements have different dimensions
> # the
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002 22:51:53 -0700 (PDT), Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> > Sean O'Rourke:
> > # On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> > # > What if (say) @b is a two-dimensional array?
> > #
> > # Then you get "interesting values of undef" :). Seriously, I
> > # sus
Brent Dax wrote:
> Keep in mind how much it could inflate the bytecode if
> we render a ton of generic, N-dimensional hyper-operator logic into
> bytecode.
The main problem I see is that you could spend minutes executing
inside that hyper op. Doesn't that screw with the plan for putting
the even
Sean O'Rourke:
# > # 4 - the other arrays boosted to the highest dimension
# > It's already been defined to be #4.
#
# Argh. Then I need to whinge a bit -- what if it's a ragged
# array? What if different elements have different dimensions
# themselves, e.g. "[1,[2,3]]"? I think there's seri
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> Sean O'Rourke:
> # On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> # > What if (say) @b is a two-dimensional array?
> #
> # Then you get "interesting values of undef" :). Seriously, I
> # suspect one of the following:
> #
> # 1 - runtime error
> # 2 - each row (or c
Sean O'Rourke:
# On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
# > What if (say) @b is a two-dimensional array?
#
# Then you get "interesting values of undef" :). Seriously, I
# suspect one of the following:
#
# 1 - runtime error
# 2 - each row (or column) of @b numified to its length
# 3 - the first e
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
> What if (say) @b is a two-dimensional array?
Then you get "interesting values of undef" :). Seriously, I suspect one
of the following:
1 - runtime error
2 - each row (or column) of @b numified to its length
3 - the first element of each row/col of @b
4 - t
Sean O'Rourke:
# On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Peter Haworth wrote:
# > Having the iteration done in the bytecode could make this simpler,
# > although at the expense of needing more bytecode.
#
# And fewer temporaries, by translating this:
#
# @a = @b ^+ @c ^+ @d;
#
# into this:
#
# for @a; @b
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On Wed 04 Sep 2002 20:31, "Sean O'Rourke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And fewer temporaries, by translating this:
> >
> > @a = @b ^+ @c ^+ @d;
> >
> > into this:
> >
> > for @a; @b; @c ; @d -> $a, $b, $c, $d is rw {
> > $d = $a + $b + $c;
On Wed 04 Sep 2002 20:31, "Sean O'Rourke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > Having the iteration done in the bytecode could make this simpler,
> > although at the expense of needing more bytecode.
>
> And fewer temporaries, by translating this:
>
> @a
On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Peter Haworth wrote:
> Having the iteration done in the bytecode could make this simpler,
> although at the expense of needing more bytecode.
And fewer temporaries, by translating this:
@a = @b ^+ @c ^+ @d;
into this:
for @a; @b; @c ; @d -> $a, $b, $c, $d is rw {
[OSCON has left me way behind in reading my mail, so apologies for the late reply]
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002 16:45:09 -0500 (CDT), David M. Lloyd wrote:
> Here's how I'd expect these expressions to be executed internally, in
> gross pseudocode, ignoring for the moment the multimethod vaporware:
>
> $r
I ran across this in looking at tidying up old bugs. It seems like things
are backwards below -- hyper-operation is a language-level shorthand for
iteration over a container, so there's no reason for the container's
vtable methods to be "hyper". Actually, it seems like there are at least
a coupl
On Wed, 14 Aug 2002, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> > The problem was that the math vtable methods were giving up if the
> > other side of the operator wasn't an int or a num. So the current
> > version of PerlArray would make $x undef. I'm not sure getting the
> > other thing's int value (as opposed
On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, Sean O'Rourke wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by "Sean O'Rourke"
> # Please include the string: [netlabs #801]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=801 >
>
>
> This patch makes the followin
# New Ticket Created by "Sean O'Rourke"
# Please include the string: [netlabs #801]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://bugs6.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=801 >
This patch makes the following behave as it does in Perl 5:
@a = 1..3; @b = 1..3;
16 matches
Mail list logo
