Re: State of PDD 0

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote: > I have created perl6-announce-pdd. Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > for clues. by the way, Adam Turoff was kind and volunteered to take the PDD archive pumpkin like he was handling the bazillion RFC's. [EMAIL PROTECTED] will thus go to him now. Be sure to

Re: ANNOUNCE: smokers@perl.org Discussion of perl's daily buildandsmoke test

Johan Vromans wrote: > > As an active non-smoker, Me too - an _EX_ which is perhaps worse :-) > I'd appreciate a different name. How about: [EMAIL PROTECTED]# [EMAIL PROTECTED] # bleeding edge? [EMAIL PROTECTED] # not very exciting... [EM

Re: ANNOUNCE: smokers@perl.org Discussion of perl's daily buildandsmoke test

Johan Vromans wrote: > > As an active non-smoker, Me too - an _EX_ which is perhaps worse :-) > I'd appreciate a different name. How about: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] (daily|weekly|...)build(er)*[EMAIL PROTECTED] #

Re: RFC archive?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Matthew Cline wrote: > What's the URL for the RFC archive? always try google first. http://www.google.com/search?q=perl6+rfc+index would have let you straight to http://dev.perl.org/rfc/ - ask -- ask bjoern hansen -

Re: C Garbage collector

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Alan Burlison wrote: > Alan Burlison wrote: > > > I've attached the HTML > > Well it was there when I sent it... does this list strip attachments or > something? yes, it does. It is usually just misconfigured mailers or spam. -- ask bjoern hansen -

RE: C Garbage collector

I agree with Damien that the Sun description sounds less portable, which we all know in the Perl world is crucial (>80 ports)(although Sun mentions 16-bit DOS/Win). Any GC implementation needs to try to 'not break' the existing stuff. Other questions are somewhat dependent upon what language is us

require < 6.x

This is probably way too late, but does this make any sense: could p6 allow (for the first few versions anyway) a "require <6;" directive? My thought was that during the install process, the admin would be prompted as to whether or not they wished to retain 'full' backward compatibility, and if

Re: State of PDD 0

On Tuesday 20 February 2001 21:45, Adam Turoff wrote: > PDDs, like the RFCs that preceded them, will need to serve multiple > purposes. One of them will be to catalog (and *name*) ideas that > keep coming up, including the bad ideas (like the |||= operator) > that we're tired of discussing. I do

Re: ANNOUNCE: smokers@perl.org Discussion of perl's daily build andsmoke test

Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and Richard Foley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whispered: | [EMAIL PROTECTED]# | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] # bleeding edge? | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] # not very exciting... | | [EMAIL PROTECTED] # hmmm? People, please trim your

lazy || and vtables

Following up from a thread a couple of weeks ago, Dan wrote: > > Dave wrote: > >Hmmm, I can't quite how that trick works. How whould the following get > >evaluated: > > > >$opened || open(F, ...) > > The second PMC would point to a lazy list, so it wouldn't be evaluated > unless its value gets f

Re: require < 6.x

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:05:19PM -0500, Stephen P. Potter wrote: > Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "NeonEdge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whisper > ed: > | This is probably way too late, but does this make any sense: could p6 allow > | (for the first few versions anyway) a "require <6;" directive

Re: Things have paused... really?

On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 12:10:53PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote: > This is perhaps the 3rd recent "waiting for Larry" comment posted in the > last week. I don't mind waiting... good things take time. We'll hang ourselves tommorrow... unless Larry comes. And if he comes, we'll be saved. -- Mich

Re: State of PDD 0

"Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, there's also Meta stuff for discussion that we should probably > document as well. As much as I disliked RFC, I also disliked PDD, as it > 'sounds' internal. But do we create a new category for every new area we > attempt to document, or d

[lenzo@cs.cmu.edu: Re: Unicode Consortium Membership]

Just a note, for anyone who's interested, that I'm thinking about getting Perl membership in the Unicode Consortium. I'd ideally like to be able to get us full voting rights, but that is prohibitively expensive. Simon - Forwarded message from "Kevin A. Lenzo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - From:

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

On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 02:19:18PM +, Simon Cozens wrote: > Sort of. What I really wanted to do was to be able to say > > sub foo { ... } > builtinify(foo); > > package bar; > foo(); # Refers to main::foo > package baz; > foo(); # Refers to main::foo > > (this is so that the forthcoming Saf

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scopefor subs)

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Bart Lateur wrote: > Actually, it's pretty common. Only, most languages are not as forgiving > as perl, and what is merely a warning in Perl, is a fatal error in those > languages. Trying to read the value of an uninitialized variable, for > example, that's commonly a fatal e

RE: require < 6.x

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:05:19PM -0500, Stephen P. Potter wrote: > If they're going to have to go in and add a "require <6" already, its easier > to just modify the #! line (and less coding for us). Duh, <> the #! line. I'm awake now, though. ;) Grant M. I've gotta stop getting up before noon.

Re: require < 6.x

Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "NeonEdge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whisper ed: | This is probably way too late, but does this make any sense: could p6 allow | (for the first few versions anyway) a "require <6;" directive? Do you understand how the current "require #;" works? It already pretty

Re: State of PDD 0

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 07:44:51PM +, David Mitchell wrote: > > Also, if we go down the 'have a competition to see who can write the best > PDD on subject X' path, can we replace the 'TBD' in unnumbered PDDs > with a short string chosen by the author? This allows us to (hopefully) > unqiuely

Re: require < 6.x

NeonEdge wrote on 2/21/01 4.07: ... >sense: could p6 allow (for the >first few versions anyway) a >"require <6;" directive? My ... This sounds to me like a good idea, especially if we implement some of the other radical changes, such as implicit 'use strict' or major changes to builtins. Person

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

Are we still having this discussion? :-) At 07:23 PM 2/21/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Its true alot languages would consider many of Perl's warnings to be >errors, that's not really analgous to what we're talking about here. > >Run-time errors aren't quite in the same spirit as run-time w

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

Its true alot languages would consider many of Perl's warnings to be errors, that's not really analgous to what we're talking about here. Run-time errors aren't quite in the same spirit as run-time warnings. A run-time error is something the language defines as being explicitly bad or a mistake (

newPMC() (was: Re: PDD 2, vtables)

Dan Sugalski wrote: > Grab one via a utility function. getPMC() or something of the sort. > > newPMC() ? ;-) I think we shouldn't rule out the possibility of having multiple newPMC() style functions for grabbing PMCs used for different activities (eg lexicals vs tmps vs guaranteed-to-have-refcoun

Re: ANNOUNCE: smokers@perl.org.... Actaually have a good name sugest

"John van V" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I actually have a good name... > > shakedown (as in cruise, matches CPANTS) I thought cruise got famous because you couldn't CPANTS. > Personally I would want to pull away from reliance on any corporation (ask > Dave Grove why) Please don't.

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 16:01:39 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Has anyone actually used a language which has run-time warnings on by >default? Or even know of one? Actually, it's pretty common. Only, most languages are not as forgiving as perl, and what is merely a warning in Perl, is a fatal er

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

Has anyone actually used a language which has run-time warnings on by default? Or even know of one? -- Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl6 Quality Assurance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Kwalitee Is Job One

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 05:32:50PM -0500, Sam Tregar wrote: > Examples? I know you're not talking about C or C++. I'm pretty sure > you're not talking about Java - exception-handling renders the term "fatal > error" almost meaningless. Well, an unhandled exception in Java is death for the progr

Re: PDD for code comments ????

Based on the silence == assent prinicple, I think we have agreed: 1. we need "a relatively strict and standard way" to document code. 2. This is the time and place to discuss it. 3. The result of the discusssion should be a PDD. 4. Most commentary should appear within the src file itself, or it's