On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:08:25 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Peter Haworth wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:57 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> >
> >>Again, C<< "STRING".split(' ') >> is different than
> >> C<< "STRING".split(/\s+/) >>. The latter will add an empty element to the
> >>beginning of
Peter Haworth wrote:
On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:57 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Again, C<< "STRING".split(' ') >> is different than
C<< "STRING".split(/\s+/) >>. The latter will add an empty element to
the beginning of the string if there is leading whitespace, which is
not the behaivor <<>> w
On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:57 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Again, C<< "STRING".split(' ') >> is different than
> C<< "STRING".split(/\s+/) >>. The latter will add an empty element to
> the beginning of the string if there is leading whitespace, which is
> not the behaivor <<>> will have (if it ac
On Fri, Dec 06, 2002 at 10:16:20AM -0700, John Williams wrote:
: On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
: >
: > What's wrong with single quoted here-docs?
:
: What's wrong is that the documentation team is trying to allow \qq[]
: there too, contradicting their own assertion that backslashes are
On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 09:46 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
3) allowing \qq[] in single-quoted here-docs.
PRO: it's consistent with single-quotes
CON: it contradicts the assertion that backslashes are not special
in single quoted here-docs
The problem is, as Larry said, that heredocs ar
> Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 10:16:20 -0700 (MST)
> From: John Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> 2) requiring balanced delimiters to be escaped,
>PRO: it's consistent with non-balanced delimiter requirements
>CON: you already can; don't force it those who don't want it
I'll say no, agreeing with
On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
>
> What's wrong with single quoted here-docs?
What's wrong is that the documentation team is trying to allow \qq[]
there too, contradicting their own assertion that backslashes are not
special in that context.
> Don't forget that the backslash is already
John Williams wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
John Williams wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
With all of the new crazy quoting shenanagains, I'm not sure that the
"balenced brackets are fine" rule will still be possible; and thus end
delimeters will
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> John Williams wrote:
> >On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> >>With all of the new crazy quoting shenanagains, I'm not sure that the
> >>"balenced brackets are fine" rule will still be possible; and thus end
> >>delimeters will always need to be es
John Williams wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
Peter Haworth wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 04:05:05 -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
A string inside a \qq[] construct acts exactly as if it were an
interpolated string. Note that any end-brackets, "]", must be escaped
within th
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Peter Haworth wrote:
> >On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 04:05:05 -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> >>>A string inside a \qq[] construct acts exactly as if it were an
> >>>interpolated string. Note that any end-brackets, "]", must be escaped
> >>>within the the \qq[] constr
> There are a few special cases for delimeters; specifically :, ( and #.
> : is not allowed because it might be used by custom-defined quoting
> operators to apply a attribute. ( is not allowed because it is used to
> pass arguments to attributes.
But if there is no attribute, then qw(this is not
Peter Haworth wrote:
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 04:05:05 -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
A string inside a \qq[] construct acts exactly as if it were an
interpolated string. Note that any end-brackets, "]", must be escaped
within the the \qq[] construct so that the parser can read it correctly.
Note
Drew Folta wrote:
=head3 <<>>; expanding a string as a list.
A set of braces is a special op that evaluates into the list of words
contained, using whitespace as the delimeter. It is similar to qw[]
from perl5, and can be thought of as roughly equivalent to:
C<< "STRING".split(' ') >>
Hmm
On Thursday, December 5, 2002, at 09:45 AM, Drew Folta wrote:
Hmm... should we mention the rough equivalence, or the technically
correct equivalence (which would be c<< "STRING".split(rx/\s+/) >>).
The answer to that question is the answer to this question: what is
the scope of this documen
Hi,
Most of my nitpicks have been covered by other people :)
Joseph F. Ryan said:
> =head3 Embedding Interpolated Strings
>
> Note that any end-brackets, "]", must be escaped within the the
> \qq[] construct so that the parser can read it correctly.
This is true regardless of whether the
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 05:09:35PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> > '\ \ \h\e\l\l\o\ \ '
> >
> > '\'\\\ \\\ \\\h\\\e\\\l\\\l\\\o\\\ \\\ \''
>
> This is wrong. '\ \ \h\e\l\l\o\ \ ' gives you a string with nine
> backslashes.
I should learn to read. What you said was right.
andrew
--
Virgo:
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 07:54:09PM +0200, arcadi shehter wrote:
> my take :
>
> non interpolating construct is a sequence of characters enclosed in
> delimiters for which perl switch off *any* perl-programm-like
> interpretation of the content. since perl have to find the end of
> this "I-am-not
Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
> Non-Interpolating constructs are strings in which expressions do
> not interpolate or expand. The exception to this rule is the
> backslash character C<\>. A single backslash which is followed
> by the current quoting delimiter, or t
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:46:25PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
>Non-Interpolating constructs are strings in which expressions do
>not interpolate or expand. The exception to this rule is the
>backslash character C<\>. A single backslash which is followed by
>another
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 03:46:25PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> Except that not what it does.
Ah, indeed. It helps if you think and write in the same context. :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 09:23:09AM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 12:27:16PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:59:32AM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> > > Non-Interpolating constructs are strings in which expressions do not
> > > interpolate or e
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 12:27:16PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:59:32AM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> > Non-Interpolating constructs are strings in which expressions do not
> > interpolate or expand. The exception to this rule is that the
> > backslash character, \, wi
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 04:05:05 -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> > A string inside a \qq[] construct acts exactly as if it were an
> > interpolated string. Note that any end-brackets, "]", must be escaped
> > within the the \qq[] construct so that the parser can read it correctly.
>
> Note that an end-brac
Joseph F. Ryan writes:
>
> The base form for a non-interpolating string is the single-quoted
> string: 'string'. However, non-interpolating strings can also be formed
> with the q[] operator. The q[] operator allows strings to be made with
Ithink it's actually opposite:
The basic ( user e
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 02:59:32AM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> In the first string, perl will take each character in the first string
> literally and perform no special processing. However, the value of the
> variable $animal is inserted into the second string string in place of
> the text $ani
One final change to my own fix:
> > with the q[] operator. The q[] operator allows strings to be made with
> > any non-space, non-letter, non-digit character as the delimeter instead
> > of '.
>
> The q[] operator allows strings to be delimited by any non-space,
> non-letter,
> non-digit charact
The content looks great. I have a few grammatical suggestions, but nothing
serious...feel free to ignore.
> =pod
>
> =head1 Strings
>
> A literal string is formed when text is enclosed by a quoting
> operator; there are two types: interpolating and non-interpolating.
Kinda confusing. How about:
This revision should be much more thorough and consistant compared to
the last 2, and also incorporates all of the major rulings handed down
by Larry in the last few days.
Remaining Issues:
- Default Object Stringification
(I'd say that defining custom stringification should go in the OO
section
29 matches
Mail list logo
