On 4 Jul 2002, Erik [ISO-8859-1] Bågfors wrote:
: On Thu, 2002-07-04 at 11:19, Andy Wardley wrote:
: > I personally believe this approach is flawed, especially considering the fact
: > that there is no way (that I know of) to force block parameters to be truly
: > lexically scoped or temporary (i
On Thu, 2002-07-04 at 11:19, Andy Wardley wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure the iterators they build are just closures with named
> > arguments, and behave as any other closure would behave.
>
> Not quite. Ruby iterators expect a block.
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 07:32:00PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
> > * Yes, Perl 6 will have named arguments to subroutines.
> >
> > What I can remember from the Perl 6 BoF is it will look something like this:
> >
> > sub foo ($this, $that) {
> >
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 01:21:50PM -0700, Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
> > Over on Perlmonks someone was asking about Perl 6's ability to have named
> > argument passing. He also asked about the Jensen Machine and Ruby iterators.
> > Now, just being o
On Fri, Jun 28, 2002 at 01:21:50PM -0700, Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
> Over on Perlmonks someone was asking about Perl 6's ability to have named
> argument passing. He also asked about the Jensen Machine and Ruby iterators.
> Now, just being on this list has taught me so much, but, I'm not quite
