On Sat, May 07, 2005 at 02:23:15PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Matt Creenan skribis 2005-05-07 1:47 (-0400):
: > I thought about $blockname <= { ... }, but <= is obviously taken, as is <==
: > $blockname <=: for 1..5 {
: > $blockname :=> for 1..5 {
: > } $blockname;
: > } <=: $blockname;
On 5/6/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The question is whether to treat the left arg the same way we treat
> attribute defaults, with one free closure call. We could say that
>
> { rand 10 } x 100
> { rand 10 } xx 100
>
> should just automatically call the closure on the left
Matt Creenan skribis 2005-05-07 4:14 (-0400):
> That brings me to another idea. Is $_ as an array used? @_?
The default signature of subs is ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juer
Matt Creenan skribis 2005-05-07 1:47 (-0400):
> I thought about $blockname <= { ... }, but <= is obviously taken, as is <==
> $blockname <=: for 1..5 {
> $blockname :=> for 1..5 {
> } $blockname;
> } <=: $blockname;
> } $blockname;
> $blockname for 1..5 {
>
Mark A. Biggar skribis 2005-05-06 22:12 (-0700):
> Actually if we define |...| at all, I'd prefer it mean abs(), its usual
> mathmatical meaning.
No. We can't just use circumfix |...| with arbitrary expressions in it,
because | is taken as an infix operator. It has to be quoteish (like <>
(this i
On Sat, 07 May 2005 01:47:08 -0400, Matt Creenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So here's some random ideas that probably make no sense ($ can be
optional.. don't know)
*snip*
That brings me to another idea. Is $_ as an array used? @_?
This relates back to the discussion on topics. Could be use @
On Sat, 07 May 2005 01:12:02 -0400, Mark A. Biggar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually if we define |...| at all, I'd prefer it mean abs(), its usual
mathmatical meaning.
I agree. I think || is just confusing.
I thought about $blockname <= { ... }, but <= is obviously taken, as is <==
So here's
Juerd wrote:
Juerd skribis 2005-05-06 18:24 (+0200):
|AVAILABLE any()
We can use this for labels:
|foo| for ... {
while ... {
...;
next foo if ...;
}
}
It'll confuse the heck out of Ruby coders, but I do like this syntax. It
makes
Larry Wall skribis 2005-05-06 18:22 (-0700):
> (But then you need to put postfix first in the heading.)
The heading uses junctions, and junctions are unordered ;)
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 06:24:00PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: {} href|closure hash (deref+)subscript (no ws)
: {}? (clash) AVAILABLE (ws)
s/AVAILABLE/statement block/
Actually, I'd try to find a way to combine all the paired ws-dependent
entries onto the same lin
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 10:43:07AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: > :: namespace ternary
:
: That's "class sigil" in term position. Separating namespaces never
: have preceding whitespace, so they're always part of some larger term.
Really more like a package sigil, which can be u
Juerd skribis 2005-05-06 18:24 (+0200):
> |AVAILABLE any()
We can use this for labels:
|foo| for ... {
while ... {
...;
next foo if ...;
}
}
It'll confuse the heck out of Ruby coders, but I do like this syntax. It
makes labels s
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:25:31AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: Any Object does Hash, and treats any argumentless method as a potential
: hash key.
I should also point out that the main reason for this is to allow
easier translation of Perl 5 idioms to Perl 6 without having to guess
whether $foo con
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 06:49:44PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
: > Why the %!@ would you ignore that!? :-)
:
: I hate my brain. Now I wonder if Bool.does(Hash). Does it? :)
Any Object does Hash, and treats any argumentless method as a potential
hash key. S
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 01:31:43PM -0400, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: > I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
: > single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
: > help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the difference.
: > Is it &prefi
> I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
> single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
> help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the difference.
> Is it &prefix: or just ¬? I have no idea. I do know that it's
> &infix:, not &x.
Patrick R. Michaud skribis 2005-05-06 12:20 (-0500):
> Ummm, what about C and C ?
I'm sticking to non-words here, as I mentally parse not and true as
single-arg subs, single-arg subs as unary operators, etcetera. I can't
help it, but I have absolutely no idea how to determine the difference.
Is it
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 06:24:00PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> To try and make it easier to pick (ASCII) operators, a simple table of
> what's given away and what's available. Please let me know if there are
> any mistakes.
>
> If anyone knows how to fill in the "???" parts, be my guest!
> [...]
>
>
Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 11:04 (-0600):
> Because we're marking all of our singular nouns with $, and you have
> to admit, the $ sigil in perl code is much more common than @ and %.
> What good is a noun marker if you mark some of your verbs with it too?
But verbing doesn't weird language a
On 5/6/05, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
> > > !not none() ???
> > Nope. In order to create those, you just need to say none(). There
> > is no operator form.
>
> Do we have postfix ! for factorials, or is it available?
Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
> Thanks! Here's an annotated bit for each ?.
Only the triple-questionmarks were meant as questions. I should have
picked a better meta-operator for AVAILABLE?. But apparently, even
though I didn't mean to ask so many questions, there still are answer
Luke Palmer skribis 2005-05-06 10:43 (-0600):
> Why the %!@ would you ignore that!? :-)
I hate my brain. Now I wonder if Bool.does(Hash). Does it? :)
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html
On 5/6/05, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To try and make it easier to pick (ASCII) operators, a simple table of
> what's given away and what's available. Please let me know if there are
> any mistakes.
Thanks! Here's an annotated bit for each ?.
> If anyone knows how to fill in the "???" pa
23 matches
Mail list logo
