Re: string encoding

On the subject of Unicode string processing... I'm not a perl internals hacker and more of a passive reader of these lists than an active contributor. With that caveat, may I humbly point out a design document for what I think is a clean C library supporting the use of mixed encoding forms. I

Re: Generating Perl 6 source with Perl

On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 09:30:50PM +, Simon Cozens wrote: > On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 04:00:05PM -0500, Sam Tregar wrote: > > I think he meant that using a symbolic debugger is hard, not that it > > wouldn't work. After all, when GDB is tell you that: > >(*fooz).blazt[10].mark[0]->set(fungl

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed > Just Because We Can. Aspects which have proven usefulness and > are deeply engrained in the Perl mindset should not be tampered > with just because some recent convert finds them un-Algol-like

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

>Johan Vromans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >>John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed >>Just Because We Can. Aspects which have proven usefulness and >>are deeply engrained in the Perl mindset should not be tampered >>with just be

Re: PDD 2, vtables

On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 05:14:44PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > =item new > >void new(PMC[, key]); > > Creates a new variable of the appropriate type out of the passed PMC, > destroying the current contents if there are any. This is a class > function. Can I suggest this becom

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 08:02:08AM -0800, yaphet jones wrote: > the tchrist (christiansen) said it best, when he described perl5: > >>>...an "expert-friendly" language... And he was right. Perl is *not* deliberately dumbed down, because, unlike other languages, we do *not* assume our users are du

Re: Generating Perl 6 source with Perl

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 12:22:44PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote: > > Very, very, very rough example so you get the idea: > [reassuring example] Here's a slightly less rough example. Pipe the following code to the attached Perl program, and look at the output on stdout, and in vtable.h: CLASS=sviv

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

At 02:37 AM 2/17/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 09:03:54PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote: > > Right now, I do a search on the standard distribution, and I see > > 'use warnings::register' in 13 out of 270 modules. Make 'use warnings' the > > default, and you'd bet that t

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

At 02:47 AM 2/17/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Yes, but like it or not, they have over 10 years of precedent behind > > >them. We're used to this situation, the screaming has already been > > >done, the scabs are healed over. Let's not pick at them. > > > > I've always picked at 'em...

Re: End-of-scope actions: Toward a hybrid approach.

Tony Olekshy wrote: > Glenn Linderman wrote: > > > > Tony Olekshy wrote: > > > > > By rule 2 above, it would seem that if $p->foo raises an Error:IO > > exception, that the except block hasn't yet been seen, and > > therefore the block should propagate unwinding. > > Ah, yup. ++$bugs{$self} OK

Re: End-of-scope actions: do/eval duality.

Thanks, Bart. So Tony, it looks like RFC 88, because of its tight coupling of exception and failure handling, needs to address the issue of "do FILE" that Bart mentions can set $@. This is an issue that results solely from the coupling of exception and failure handling, not from the syntax and s

Re: PDD 2, vtables

At 04:55 PM 2/17/2001 +, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 05:14:44PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > =item new > > > >void new(PMC[, key]); > > > > Creates a new variable of the appropriate type out of the passed PMC, > > destroying the current contents if there ar

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 11:09:29AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote: > >No, there will probably be a big push to shut it off, based on > >historical reactions to this sort of thing. > > Maybe I'm missing something; I'm sure the philosophy is for the standard > distribution to be -w clean, so shouldn't e

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

> I thought that was the problem you were having. Forgetting to type > "use strict" in your programs. No -- its *anywhere* that you write scripts/modules/what have you. Anywhere you miss it, it is a syntax error to me. > Modules? Modules should have test suites. A simple test would be to > ch

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

Oops. Forgot a few points. I said that you should give me the courtesy of responding to all of my points, and > I think we're rapidly approaching "agree to disagree" territory here. No we are not. If you come up with some good counter arguments, maybe. I am the first person to admit when someo

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (oops)

oops -- posted to perl6-language by mistake... sorry, Ed Oops. Forgot a few points. I said that you should give me the courtesy of responding to all of my points, and > I think we're rapidly approaching "agree to disagree" territory here. No we are not. If you come up with some good c

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

>On Sat, Feb 17 2001 09:04:54 -0800, Simon Cozens wrote: > >On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 08:02:08AM -0800, yaphet jones wrote: >> the tchrist (christiansen) said it best, when he described perl5: >>...an "expert-friendly" language... > >And he was right. Perl is *not* deliberately dumbed down, because

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 01:31:27PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote: > > I thought that was the problem you were having. Forgetting to type > > "use strict" in your programs. > > No -- its *anywhere* that you write scripts/modules/what have you. Anywhere > you miss it, it is a syntax error to me. I

Re: PDD 2, vtables

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 02:34:08PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > Well, the idea was that the passed in PMC is either reusable, can be > trashed, or is an aggregate of some point and we may autoviv the element > corresponding to the key. Right, OK, but how do we create them in the first place? >

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

At 02:49 PM 2/17/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >PERL5OPT='-Mwarnings -Mstrict' perl -wle 'print keys %INC' >unkown warnings category '-Mstrict' at -e line 0 >BEGIN failed--compilation aborted. > >It seems to be parsing that as: C. IMHO this >is a bug. Yes, MJD pointed it out last November i

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

At 02:49 PM 2/17/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 11:09:29AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote: > > >No, there will probably be a big push to shut it off, based on > > >historical reactions to this sort of thing. > > > > Maybe I'm missing something; I'm sure the philosophy is for

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 05:28:51PM -0800, Peter Scott wrote: > Why this difference depending on whether I reference a module with an > absolute path or a relative one? That's very, umm... interesting. Hmm. Post it to p5p, see what happens.

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

Johan Vromans wrote: > > If a Perl construct does not suffer from a slight change that makes > it easier to accept by new programmers, I think such changes should > be seriously considered. Yes; but the world if full of language [sorry, couldn't resist] which is optimized (or at least meant to b

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

anonymous troll wrote: > > yet another _example_ of perl's "expert vs. newbie" snobbery. It's simply a design decision. And there's plenty of reason for thinking it's the better way to decide. "Make something idiot-proof..." But s/idiot/newbie/. > the "perl mindset": it's what's now driving

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

>Johan Vromans wrote: >> >> If a Perl construct does not suffer from a slight change that makes >> it easier to accept by new programmers, I think such changes should >> be seriously considered. > >Yes; but the world if full of language [sorry, couldn't resist] >which is optimized (or at least m

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

anonymous troll wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > Unfortunately, to the two optimizations are mostly disjoint. > > this is completely false when applied to real programming languages. Oh? > => example 1: php > . less cryptic (but more verbose) more verbose == not optimized for the exper

Re: End-of-scope actions: Toward a hybrid approach.

Glenn Linderman wrote: > you'll note that RFC 119 does, in fact, place catch statements inside > the scope of the block to which they apply, Yup! I wish I could take credit for this, historically, but an examination of the archives shows that Glenn holds priority. > So in RFC 119, we have in-

Re: End-of-scope actions: Toward a hybrid approach.

John Porter wrote: > > So in RFC 119, we have in-scope catch statements, dangling except > > clauses, and dangling always clauses. > > I'll go on the record as saying that I am totally opposed to > dangling "clauses" of any kind. Now that's just the sort of Gibralter-like position that begs to b

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

Feeding the troll: > => example 2: ruby > => now more popular than python in its native japan Python isn't native to Japan. -- MISTAKES: It Could Be That The Purpose Of Your Life Is Only To Serve As A Warning To Others http://www.desp

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

So since when did perl6-language become perl-advocacy? Rephrased: Could people please take the advocacy traffic elsewhere where it isn't noise? Thanks. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 08:53:51PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > So since when did perl6-language become perl-advocacy? Rephrased: Could > people please take the advocacy traffic elsewhere where it isn't noise? > Thanks. Methinks trolls can't read. -- $jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ #

[PATCH perl.c] Fixing PERL5OPT (was Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN)

On Sun, Feb 18, 2001 at 04:45:46AM +, Simon Cozens wrote: > On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 05:00:51PM -0800, Peter Scott wrote: > > Simon Cozens submitted a patch which failed the test > > ...and MJD and Jarkko and I worked on it and we put together something > which was OK. Both Simon's and Peter'

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

>Feeding the troll: careful with the troll talk: remember, your god's favorite book is the "lord of the rings"...chock full of trolls...and hobbits, too! >> => example 2: ruby >> => now more popular than python in its native japan > >Python isn't native to Japan. obviously, nitwit...ruby is th

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope

yaphet jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Johan Vromans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >>John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >>As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed > >>Just Because We Can. Aspects which have proven usefulness and > >>are deeply eng