On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:41:59PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> private="REFCOUNTED"
> refcnt="1">
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [...]
>
> Hope this helps
I sense a great evil. An evil that has been in abeyance since the
defeat of IP
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 11:04:43AM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:49:13PM -0500, Joshua Juran wrote:
: > On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: > >Excellent. Now if only I knew a good language for text filters...
: >
: > How about sed or awk?
:
: Hm. I
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 12:49:13PM -0500, Joshua Juran wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >Excellent. Now if only I knew a good language for text filters...
>
> How about sed or awk?
Hm. If only we had a pir2xml, I could use XSLT.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Nov 29, 2005, at 5:16 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:13:05PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Nov 29, 2005, at 21:36, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
I'm planning a flag day sometime in December. I'm also planning to
create a simple "handles most cases" translator.
That's a
My view I understand the way it's currently done. I'm totally lost
at what's being proposed.
Joshua
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Roger Browne wrote:
> Salzenberg wrote:
>
> > ... any language using ":=" for assignment is doomed
> > to obscurity.[*] It's a law of nature.
>
> :-)
>
> > (Ah, langua
Salzenberg wrote:
> ... any language using ":=" for assignment is doomed
> to obscurity.[*] It's a law of nature.
:-)
> (Ah, language design. :-))
No choice will satisfy everyone. So we each say our piece, then we
happily accept whatever the designer decides. No problem.
Regards,
Roger Brow
On Nov 29, 2005, at 15:08, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Comments? Fresh or rotten vegetables?
My objections:
Consider:
P0 = P1
P0 = S1
P0 = I1
P0 = N1
o/~ One of these things is not like the others
One of these things just doesn't belong o/~
And if I have to read:
P0 =
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 05:51:42PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
>I think of PMCs as being objects, not containers for something else,
> and ":=" as meaning "copy the object" (which is synonymous with "copy
> the reference to the object") and "=" as "copy the contents." Under
> this interpretation,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 10:45:12PM +, Roger Browne wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:08 -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='.
>
> Is some different symbol possible, to avoid confusing people who use
> Algol-like languages where ":="
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 05:17:25PM -0500, Matt Fowles wrote:
> I very much like it. I think I may have suggested something like it
> earlier (although I might have only thought it).
It's entirely possible. Great minds think alike ... and us too,
apparently. :-)
> "Computer Science is merely th
From: Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 13:07:22 -0800
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
> So "aliasing" copies the pointer (i.e. the object itself), and
> "assignment" copies the value?
Right. Note, however, that you have to *
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 12:08 -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='.
Is some different symbol possible, to avoid confusing people who use
Algol-like languages where ":=" means assignment (Amber, Ada, Eiffel,
Delphi...)?
How about:
"=>"
Chip~
On 11/29/05, Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consider:
>
>P0 = P1
>P0 = S1
>P0 = I1
>P0 = N1
>
> o/~ One of these things is not like the others
> One of these things just doesn't belong o/~
>
> And if I have to read:
>
>P0 = new .Integer
>P0 = 1
>
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 11:13:05PM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2005, at 21:36, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >I'm planning a flag day sometime in December. I'm also planning to
> >create a simple "handles most cases" translator.
>
> That's all ok with me, but not without an automatic tr
On Nov 29, 2005, at 21:36, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
I'm planning a flag day sometime in December. I'm also planning to
create a simple "handles most cases" translator.
That's all ok with me, but not without an automatic translator, that
"handles 99.99% cases". As the current syntax is clear,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 04:27:28PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:25:13PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> > > Or, perhaps more accurately, `P1 := ...\n assign P0, P1`?
> >
> > No, PIR doesn't do that kind of thing (allocating
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:25:13PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> > Or, perhaps more accurately, `P1 := ...\n assign P0, P1`?
>
> No, PIR doesn't do that kind of thing (allocating P registers) behind
> your back. If a sequence needs a second P register,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:55:22PM -0500, Bob Rogers wrote:
> So "aliasing" copies the pointer (i.e. the object itself), and
> "assignment" copies the value?
Right. Note, however, that you have to *have* a pointer for "copying
the pointer" to be meaningful. Thus, since I and N registers are not
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:38:55PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> > > I'm not sure about the last two (in a lot of ways, they're more like
> > > := than = ),
> >
> >
From: Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 12:27:03 -0800
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
> >P0 := opcod
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:36:03PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> > Second comment: how about access to keyed items -- does this mean:
> >
> > P0 := P1[S1] # alias
> > S0 = P1[S1]# assignment
> > I0 = P1[S1]
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:36:03PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> > P0 = P1[S1]# supported?
>
> Yes, it means to fetch a PMC and make P0 an alias to it. Perl 6
> equivalent should be, more or less:
>
> $a := $arra
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 03:25:13PM -0500, Matt Diephouse wrote:
> Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='.
>
> "And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs and
> sloths, and carp and anchovies, and orangutans
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> > I'm not sure about the last two (in a lot of ways, they're more like
> > := than = ),
>
> I don't see that.
Well, for one thing, my way would mean that `set` is always `:=`.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:08:01PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
> >P0 := opcode # aliasing: P0 points to PMC returned by opcode
> >P0 = ... # assignm
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 02:18:17PM -0600, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> Personally I haven't had much trouble with '=' and I don't think
> I ever use ':='. Perhaps I've just trained myself to the current
> implementation, but I like that the shorter '=' does what I tend
> to want/expect and I write
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:14:24PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
> Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
> >P0 := opcode # aliasing: P0 points to PMC returned by opcode
> >P0 = ... # assignment: modifies P0
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And if I have to read:
>
>P0 = new .Integer
>P0 = 1
>
> one more time... *sigh*
>
> Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='. This will
> affect all code generated to use P and S registers. It should be an easy fix
> (a
On Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 12:08:01PM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> Therefore, I propose requiring people to spell aliasing as ':='. This will
> affect all code generated to use P and S registers. It should be an easy fix
> (albeit an extensive one). And if we don't do it now, it'll just get hard
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>P0 := P1 # aliasing: P0 and P1 point to same PMC
>P0 := opcode # aliasing: P0 points to PMC returned by opcode
>P0 = ... # assignment: modifies P0, NO MATTER WHAT '...' IS
>
>S0 := S1 # aliasing: S0 and S1 point to sa
30 matches
Mail list logo
