OK, perl6-language is getting scary again ;-) So here's something else
to think about. Code coverage.
We don't have to worry about how to do it here. That's a problem for
internals, and they seem to be solving it quite well without my
interference at the moment, even if they are not aware of th
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 21:37:32 +
> From: Aaron Crane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Disposition: inline
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> Damian Conway writes:
> > My personal favorite solution is to use s
Interesting point, especially if operator:+= can be overloaded.
@a [+=] @b;
implies iteratively invoking operator:+=, whereas
@a [+]= @b;
implies assigning the result of iteratively invoking operator:+
It only matters when they're different. :-|
And, of course, if they ARE different then t
At 1:34 PM -0800 10/29/02, Brian Ingerson wrote:
On 29/10/02 14:47 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 10:22 AM -0800 10/29/02, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>This is why I am nervous about introducing terms like eigenbunny, etc.
Oh, I dunno, I kind of like it. Of course, now my kids want
eigenbunny slip
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002 14:19:59 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> So I would like to see able to tag arbitrary information onto just about
> everything, including files, packages, classes, subroutines, blocks, control
> structures, statements, lines, expressions, variables and whatever else I've
> forgott
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: > @x [+]= @y;
:
: I guess that's OK looking, tho either is fine with me.
My only syntactic quibble with [+] is that it's officially ambiguous
when it's a unary operator:
@a = [+]@b
could also be the start of
@a = [+1, +2, +3]
Or worse:
Okay, For those of you playing the home game, Take 5, with Damian &
Larry's latest inputs. ^ means xor again, and a few things have been
removed. Comments?
Note that I will next post a list of hyperoperators _separately_.
If the design team could take a look, esp. at the remaining questions,
For this version of the operator list, (since I am unsure that _every_
unary/binary op has a meaningful hyper, and some tentatively have
_two_) I have placed all of them in EXPLICITLY. Please check that I
didn't miss any, or put any in that are incorrect.
hyperoperators:
[op] - as prefix
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Wheeler) writes:
> Well, I like "set operators," too, but what's the grammatical term for
> the above "logically entangled list of nouns"?
Conjunctions and disjunctions.
--
Wouldn't you love to fill out that report? "Company asset #423423
was lost while fighting the fo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Mitchell) writes:
> (I'm thinking utf8 here).
I'd strongly advise against that.
--
Ermine? NO thanks. I take MINE black.
- Henry Braun is Oxford Zippy
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
:(is whitespace allowed inside the brackets, e.g. [ + ] vs. [+] ?)
I don't think so.
: unary (prefix) operators:
:. - method call on current topic
I think we have to have unary .= as well, if we're to do the
.=replace
trick on $_.
:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: For this version of the operator list, (since I am unsure that _every_
: unary/binary op has a meaningful hyper, and some tentatively have
: _two_) I have placed all of them in EXPLICITLY. Please check that I
: didn't miss any, or put any in that ar
On 30 Oct 2002, Simon Cozens wrote:
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Mitchell) writes:
: > (I'm thinking utf8 here).
:
: I'd strongly advise against that.
Actually, it works out rather well in practice, because the string
abstraction in Perl is that of a sequence of codepoints. But at
least in Perl 5,
At 1:20 AM + 10/30/02, Simon Cozens wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Mitchell) writes:
(I'm thinking utf8 here).
I'd strongly advise against that.
I'd agree. Thinking UTF-8 is generally a bad idea.
If you think anything, think fixed-size code points, since that's
what you're ultimately g
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Martin D Kealey wrote:
: Hmmm...
:
: I've heard that this is a culturally driven thing: that whilst people can
: all disambiguate it, people from different cultures may do so differently
:
: In a "western" culture, exclusive-or is the assumed default unless context
: implies
Larry Wall:
# So I'm actually being a bit culturally imperialistic in
# pushing for noun disjunctions. But I'm an American, and
# nobody expects better of me. :-)
I would argue that you should draw on useful concepts from any language,
not paying any attention to their existence in other langu
Larry Wall [mailto:larry@;wall.org] wrote:
> : unary (postfix) operators:
> :... - [maybe] same as ..Inf [Damian votes Yes]
>
> I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
> endpoints by saying something like 1..!10.
Perhaps we could use the less-than symbol: 1 ..< 10
Luke Palmer [mailto:fibonaci@;babylonia.flatirons.org] wrote:
> for @x | @y -> $x is rw | $y {
> $x += $y
> }
This superposition stuff is getting to me: I had a double-take,
wondering why we were iterating with superpositions (Bitops
never entered my mind). Did the C<;> ever o
On Aug-08, Peter Gibbs wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by Peter Gibbs
> # Please include the string: [perl #16077]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # http://rt.perl.org/rt2/Ticket/Display.html?id=16077 >
>
>
> Attached patch implements Dan's new 'assign P
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Whipp wrote:
: Luke Palmer [mailto:fibonaci@;babylonia.flatirons.org] wrote:
:
: > for @x | @y -> $x is rw | $y {
: > $x += $y
: > }
:
: This superposition stuff is getting to me: I had a double-take,
: wondering why we were iterating with superpositio
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Brent Dax wrote:
: (I think that at one point you mentioned that 'it' is implicit in
: Japanese--so does $_ qualify? :^) )
Only when you leave it out. Kind of like the cat.
Larry
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote:
> Hell, we might as well throw in multiple dispatch.
Actually, I am really hoping we do.
> Any of you OO guys know of a case where
>
> $a = $a + $b; # @A [+]= @B; --> @A = @A [+] @B;
>
> and
>
> $a += $b; # @A [+=] @B;
>
> should be
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 1:34 PM -0800 10/29/02, Brian Ingerson wrote:
> >Every eigenbunny needs a supercozy!
>
> Absolutely. Eigenbunnies in supercozens. Sounds like we've found the
> mascot for Perl 6!
I really want to work a "pear pimples for hairy fishnuts" reference i
On Tue, 29 Oct 2002, David Whipp wrote:
: Larry Wall [mailto:larry@;wall.org] wrote:
: > : unary (postfix) operators:
: > :... - [maybe] same as ..Inf [Damian votes Yes]
: >
: > I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
: > endpoints by saying something like 1..!10.
:
Larry Wall wrote:
> :... - [maybe] range, exclusive of endpoint [Damian votes No]
>
> Could have ^..^ and ^..too, for all that.
OK, I just gotta say, that's _d*mn_ clever. "Exclusive of endpoint" --
It looks like what it is, and vice versa. I guess that's why you're our
fearless leader.
> : > I wonder if we can possibly get the Rubyesque leaving out of
> : > endpoints by saying something like 1..!10.
> :
> : Similarly: 1 >..< 10 == 2..9
> There's also an issue of what (1..10) - 1 would or should
> mean, if anything. Does it mean (1..9)? Does 1 + (1..10)
> mean (2..10)?
>
> A
Larry Wall:
# Of course, Real Mathematicians will want [1..10) and (1..10] instead.
#
# Double ick.
Reminds me of the number-line notation you learn about *before*
precalculus (or whatever the value of
$you.schooling.grade[12].class{math}.name is) confuses everything, with
open vs. closed circles
Brent Dax wrote:
> Larry Wall:
> # There's also an issue of what (1..10) - 1 would or should
> # mean, if anything. Does it mean (1..9)? Does 1 + (1..10)
Actually, I would at first glance think, based on the parens, that:
(1..10)-1
means
((1-1)..(10-1))
means
(0..9)
101 - 128 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
