On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 08:43:30 -0700, jan-olof.hen...@bredband.net wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:50:43 -0700, sml...@gmail.com wrote:
> > It looks like this bug hasn't been *completely* fixed:
> >
> > dd &infix:<+>( "2" ); # 2
> > dd &infix:<*>( "2" ); # 2
> >
> > dd [*] "2";
On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 12:50:43 -0700, sml...@gmail.com wrote:
> It looks like this bug hasn't been *completely* fixed:
>
> dd &infix:<+>( "2" ); # 2
> dd &infix:<*>( "2" ); # 2
>
> dd [*] "2"; # 2
> dd [+] "2"; # 2
>
> dd reduce &infix:<*>, "2"; # 2
> d
It looks like this bug hasn't been *completely* fixed:
dd &infix:<+>( "2" ); # 2
dd &infix:<*>( "2" ); # 2
dd [*] "2"; # 2
dd [+] "2"; # 2
dd reduce &infix:<*>, "2"; # 2
dd reduce &infix:<+>, "2"; # "2"
i.e. it doesn't work w
The original fix was reverted in
https://github.com/rakudo/rakudo/commit/121e5e32e9 per discussion
https://irclog.perlgeek.de/perl6-dev/2017-01-21#i_13962511
FWIW, my math[^1] suggests with current system we'd need 22 more candidates to
handle Cool, bringing the total to 52 candidates.
IMO Cool candidates are important to have, perhaps we can de-optimize something
that won't have a huge performance hit, while reducing the candidates to saner
levels?
# New Ticket Created by Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev
# Please include the string: [perl #130439]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=130439 >
Code:
my @a = ; say @a.splice: ^3
Result (2015.12,2016.07.1):
[d e f
On Tue, 06 Dec 2016 19:00:22 -0800, alex.jakime...@gmail.com wrote:
> Code:
> say 42 xx ‘123abc’
>
> Result (2016.06):
> Cannot convert string to number: trailing characters after number in
> '123abc' (indicated by )
> in block at /tmp/vENGo0kTCa line 1
>
> Actually thrown at:
> in block at
# New Ticket Created by Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev
# Please include the string: [perl #130288]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=130288 >
Code:
say 42 xx ‘123abc’
Result (2016.06):
Cannot convert string to
Hmmm…. in RT #128757 you expect a single value to return identity, and here you
expect it not to return it? By the same reasoning that [/] “hello” returns
“hello”, I think [*] set(1,2,3) should return set(1,2,3).
Or am I missing something?
> On 27 Jul 2016, at 23:29, Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Al
# New Ticket Created by Aleks-Daniel Jakimenko-Aleksejev
# Please include the string: [perl #128758]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=128758 >
Code:
say [*] set(1,2,3), set(4,5,6)
Result:
9
OK, that ↑ makes sen
On Mon Mar 16 13:13:35 2015, elizabeth wrote:
> > On 16 Mar 2015, at 18:50, Christian Bartolomaeus via RT > comm...@bugs6.perl.org> wrote:
> > $ perl6 -e 'say "abcd".index("xyz") == 0'
> > Invocant requires an instance, but a type object was passed
> > in method Bridge at src/gen/m-CORE.setting:5
> On 16 Mar 2015, at 18:50, Christian Bartolomaeus via RT
> wrote:
> $ perl6 -e 'say "abcd".index("xyz") == 0'
> Invocant requires an instance, but a type object was passed
> in method Bridge at src/gen/m-CORE.setting:5603
> in sub infix:<==> at src/gen/m-CORE.setting:5521
> in block at -e:1
Now all three commands complain about a type object being passed when an
instance is required:
$ perl6 -e 'say +Failure'
Invocant requires an instance, but a type object was passed
in method Numeric at src/gen/m-CORE.setting:15733
in block at -e:1
$ perl6 -e 'say "abcd".index("xyz") == 0'
I
On Mon Sep 19 21:43:52 2011, coke wrote:
> On Wed Jun 30 07:48:56 2010, masak wrote:
> > rakudo: say "abcd".index("xyz") == 0
> > rakudo aa015a: OUTPUT�Method 'Bridge' not found for invocant
> > of class 'Failure' [...]
> > arnsholt: possible issue :)
> > * masak submits rakudobug
> > rakudo: F
# New Ticket Created by Will Coleda
# Please include the string: [perl #105116]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=105116 >
09:35 < [Coke]> nom: say +":16"
09:35 <+p6eval> nom 17a235: OUTPUT«3735928559»
09
On Wed Jun 30 07:48:56 2010, masak wrote:
> rakudo: say "abcd".index("xyz") == 0
> rakudo aa015a: OUTPUT�Method 'Bridge' not found for invocant
> of class 'Failure' [...]
> arnsholt: possible issue :)
> * masak submits rakudobug
> rakudo: Failure == 0
> rakudo aa015a: OUTPUT�Method 'Bridge' no
# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #85514]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=85514 >
rakudo: +sub {}
rakudo bd134e: OUTPUT«maximum recursion depth exceeded in
'Cool::Num
# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #76294]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=76294 >
rakudo: say "abcd".index("xyz") == 0
rakudo aa015a: OUTPUT«Method 'Bridge' not found f
# New Ticket Created by Cory Spencer
# Please include the string: [perl #64360]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=64360 >
The attached patch allows Perl 6 classes to numify via a Num multi method
like
anyway, S03 says that "By default C and C use
C semantics." I don't think that implies numification of the arguments.
oh.
but what happens when you cmp a Num and a List?
I don't know.
Neither does Parrot, which is why we get "No suitable
candidate found ... " :-)
pasting this addendum to the
# New Ticket Created by "Carl Mäsak"
# Please include the string: [perl #63778]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=63778 >
rakudo: my @a = 1,2,3; say @a min 4
rakudo 531ca2: OUTPUT«Multiple Dispatch: No suitab
[...]
* masak cackles evilly
* masak submits rakudobug
I imagine it's an error to try to numify a Whatever star. But perhaps
not that error.
Jon Lang wrote:
> That's a good point. Is there an easy way to distinguish between
> passing a pair into a positional parameter vs. passing a value into a
> named parameter?
Off the top of my head, see S06 for the gory details:
my $pair = a => 'b';
named(a => 'b');
named(:a);
named(|$pair);
Moritz Lenz wrote:
> Off the top of my head, see S06 for the gory details:
>
> my $pair = a => 'b';
>
> named(a => 'b');
> named(:a);
> named(|$pair);
>
> positional((a => 'b'));
> positional((:a));
> positional($pair);
As you say: the gory details, emphasis on gory. But if that's the way
of thin
TSa wrote:
> I see no problem as long as say gets a pair as argument. Then it can
> print the key and value separated with a tab. More problematic are
> string concatenations of the form
>
> say "the pair is: " ~ (foo => $bar);
>
> which need to be written so that say sees the pair
>
> say "the
HaloO,
Moritz Lenz wrote:
The counter example is if you want to print a pair:
.say for %hash.pairs.sort: { .value };
In that case it would be nice to have the key appear in the stringification.
I see no problem as long as say gets a pair as argument. Then it can
print the key and value separ
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 04:43:51PM -0700, David Green wrote:
>> I can't really think of a great example where you'd want to numify a
>> pair, but I would expect printing one to produce something like "a =>
>
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 04:43:51PM -0700, David Green wrote:
> I can't really think of a great example where you'd want to numify a
> pair, but I would expect printing one to produce something like "a =>
> 23" (especially since that's what a one-element
mark.a.big...@comcast.net wrote:
> -- Original message --
> From: Larry Wall
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:24:54PM +0100, TSa wrote:
>> > My idea is to let a pair numify to whatever the value numifies to.
>> > Same thing with strin
Larry Wall wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:24:54PM +0100, TSa wrote:
>> HaloO,
>>
>> Carl Mäsak wrote:
>>> Pugs and Elf currently numify a Pair object to 2, and Rakudo currently
>>> dies of despair.
>>>
>>> My guess is that the sema
ble either, since it's easy to coerce stuff to strings if
that's what you want.
I guess you could force complaining with: infix:(Any, Any) =
{ die "Apples and oranges!" }
When are you going to be asked to stringify or numify a Pair?
Actual use-cases, please. Perso
nges.
When are you going to be asked to stringify or numify a Pair? Actual
use-cases, please. Personally, I can't think of any.
--
Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
>>>>> "mab" == mark a biggar writes:
mab> -- Original message --
mab> From: Larry Wall
>> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:24:54PM +0100, TSa wrote:
>> > My idea is to let a pair numify to whatever the value numif
-- Original message --
From: Larry Wall
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:24:54PM +0100, TSa wrote:
> > My idea is to let a pair numify to whatever the value numifies to.
> > Same thing with stringification. In general I think that a pair should
> >
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:24:54PM +0100, TSa wrote:
> HaloO,
>
> Carl Mäsak wrote:
>> Pugs and Elf currently numify a Pair object to 2, and Rakudo currently
>> dies of despair.
>>
>> My guess is that the semantics of Pugs and Elf falls out naturally
>> for
HaloO,
Carl Mäsak wrote:
Pugs and Elf currently numify a Pair object to 2, and Rakudo currently
dies of despair.
My guess is that the semantics of Pugs and Elf falls out naturally
form a pair being treated as a list of two elements, or something. The
question still deserves to be raised
Pugs and Elf currently numify a Pair object to 2, and Rakudo currently
dies of despair.
My guess is that the semantics of Pugs and Elf falls out naturally
form a pair being treated as a list of two elements, or something. The
question still deserves to be raised whether always-2 is a good
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 01:22:24AM -0600, Chris Dolan wrote:
> Currently, you can overload number context by creating a __get_number()
> method and boolean context via __get_bool(). Should there be an
> analogous Num() and Bool() method on Object? Would it Num() return 0 by
> default? And a
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 23:22, Chris Dolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In "[perl #60350] [TODO] default __get_string method", Patrick added a
> default Object.Str() that classes can override to get custom
> stringification. Formerly, you could do that only by defining a method
> named __get_string
In "[perl #60350] [TODO] default __get_string method", Patrick added
a default Object.Str() that classes can override to get custom
stringification. Formerly, you could do that only by defining a
method named __get_string().
Currently, you can overload number context by creating a __get_nu
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 02:57:53PM +0200, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
: If we want some interoperbility with Python dicts, hashing will not be
: done on ids but on the hash function of the type.
Which Perl could default to id.
Larry
Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What does unboxed values return for their "id", though?
> 3 =:= 3; # always true?
> 3.id ~~ 3.id; # ditto?
Maybe true or not, that's highly implementation dependent. I'd not touch
these internals:
$ python
Python 2.4 [...]
>>> id(2) ==
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 10:54:34AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 07:28:03PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > That's what .id is supposed to do, without the bogus numorstringification
: > semantics. It should return something opaque that matches with ~~.
:
: Okay, implemented a
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 07:28:03PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> That's what .id is supposed to do, without the bogus numorstringification
> semantics. It should return something opaque that matches with ~~.
Okay, implemented as such.
What does unboxed values return for their "id", though?
3 =
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 09:47:52PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: Hello all.
:
: In the processing of working with mugwump's shiny new perl6 OO Set.pm.
: I realized that we do not currently have a way to uniquely identify
: objects in Pugs like the way we have in perl5 (object stringification).
On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 21:47:52 -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> In the processing of working with mugwump's shiny new perl6 OO Set.pm. I
> realized that we
> do not currently have a way to uniquely identify objects in Pugs like the way
> we have in
> perl5 (object stringification
Hello all.
In the processing of working with mugwump's shiny new perl6 OO Set.pm.
I realized that we do not currently have a way to uniquely identify
objects in Pugs like the way we have in perl5 (object stringification).
So I asked Autrijus, and he promptly implemented a rudimentary object
num
47 matches
Mail list logo
