On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 11:46:46AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
: Markus Laire writes:
: > Larry Wall wrote:
: > >Since it's not a problem for syntax that can be recognized at compile
: > >time, your slice above might be allowed if you "declare" the thunks
: > >with curlies:
: > >
: > >@3d_slice =
Markus Laire writes:
> Larry Wall wrote:
> >Since it's not a problem for syntax that can be recognized at compile
> >time, your slice above might be allowed if you "declare" the thunks
> >with curlies:
> >
> >@3d_slice = @array[ {!($_ % 2)}; 0..9:3; {?test($_)} ];
> >
>
> How does the compiler
Larry Wall wrote:
Since it's not a problem for syntax that can be recognized at compile
time, your slice above might be allowed if you "declare" the thunks
with curlies:
@3d_slice = @array[ {!($_ % 2)}; 0..9:3; {?test($_)} ];
How does the compiler know that those ';'s within curlies are
List-o
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 05:33:04PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: Also, how does that philosophy fit with the bare thunking in array
: slices, as listed in A05?
:
: @3d_slice = @array[ !($_ % 2) ; 0..9:3; ?test($_) ];
If I recall, the discussions around S9 indicated that it might be a bad
ide
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:04:31PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:30:10PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> : I wonder if there is a way to expose this trait to the user,
> : though... A quick grep did not find anything. Anyone got ideas?
>
> For the most part we'll delay evalua
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 01:30:10PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 12:31:05PM +1100, Andrew Savige wrote:
: > Ferreting around in the #perl6 logs I noticed an acknowledgement
: > that short-circuiting is "borken" as at 15 Maart. Oh well, time
: > for the "mad golfer" to dust o
On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 12:31:05PM +1100, Andrew Savige wrote:
> Ferreting around in the #perl6 logs I noticed an acknowledgement
> that short-circuiting is "borken" as at 15 Maart. Oh well, time
> for the "mad golfer" to dust off his trusty sand iron and hack
> his way out of this punishing Pugs s
Ferreting around in the #perl6 logs I noticed an acknowledgement
that short-circuiting is "borken" as at 15 Maart. Oh well, time
for the "mad golfer" to dust off his trusty sand iron and hack
his way out of this punishing Pugs sand trap. :-)
/-\
Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movi
--- Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
> Andrew Savige wrote:
>> The following program:
>>
>> my $x = 1;
>> my $y = 2;
>> $x == 1 or $y = 42;
> ^ typo?
No, it's not a typo. I was (perhaps not very clearly) trying to
demonstrate that the short-circuiting operators, namely:
or and && |
Hi,
Andrew Savige wrote:
> The following program:
>
> my $x = 1;
> my $y = 2;
> $x == 1 or $y = 42;
^ typo?
> print"x='$x' y='$y'\n";
>
> prints x='1' y='2' in perl5, but prints x='1' y='42' in pugs.
using r763, it works correctly:
$ ./pugs -we 'my $x = 1; my $y = 2; $x == 1 o
Andrew Savige wrote:
Oh, and should I add:
use v6;
at the top of my Pugs .p6 scripts? (I have no idea what that does,
just noticed it in some other example scripts).
It tells that script needs perl v6.*.* to work and I think it's good
practise to add that to every perl6 script.
--
Markus Laire
11 matches
Mail list logo
