I've been looking over the rx.ops, and am amazed at how cool it is :)
I'm wondering, however -- was this based on something else?
That is, does there exist some utility which translates regexen into C
(or assembly) code, similar to how we translate regexen into parrot
code?
I've been searching,
On Apr-03, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
>
> I've been looking over the rx.ops, and am amazed at how cool it is :)
>
> I'm wondering, however -- was this based on something else?
I believe Brent cooked it up more or less from scratch. It also served
as the inspiration for a couple more attempts at a
Steve Fink wrote:
>
> On Apr-03, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> >
> > I've been looking over the rx.ops, and am amazed at how cool it is :)
> >
> > I'm wondering, however -- was this based on something else?
>
> I believe Brent cooked it up more or less from scratch. It also served
> as the inspirati
Dave Whipp wrote:
> Joe Gottman wrote:
>
> > Alternatively, there might be a new parameter type that indicates
> > that the parameter is not evaluated immediately:
> >
> > sub infix:!! ($lsh, $rhs is deferred) {...}
> A nice concept! So nice, in fact, that it would be a shame to limit
> it to
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:29:37AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
> >This has been alluded to before.
> >
> >What would /A*B*/ produce?
> >
> >Because if you were just processing the rex, I think you'd have to
> >finish generating all possibilities of A* before you began iterating
> >over B*...
>
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Whipp wrote:
> > Joe Gottman wrote:
Getting deep -- sorry. :)
> > > Alternatively, there might be a new parameter type that indicates
> > > that the parameter is not evaluated immediately:
> > >
> > > sub infix:!! ($lsh, $rhs is deferred) {.
Austin Hastings writes:
>
> On the other hand, let's suppose that you've got a vast array of
> floating point data:
>
> my float @seti = {...evidence of intelligence, somewhere...};
>
> It's a fair question to ask how to retarget the rexengine to use @seti
> as the input stream. (I hereb
Another one of my little annonyances in the current state of P6 is how
run-time properties are accessed. Accessing properties as methods is
pretty, but I see it as potentially dangerous.
Adding a new method to a class that happens to be the same as
somebody's property would be lucky to get some k
a = arcadi shehter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
a>I think this was already discussed once and then it was proposed to
a>attach a property to characters of the string
a>
a> sub peek_at_sky {
a>
a> my Color @numbers = peek_with_some_hardware;
a>
a> my $say_it = join map { "1" but color($_) } @number
Paul wrote:
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dave Whipp wrote:
Joe Gottman wrote:
Getting deep -- sorry. :)
Alternatively, there might be a new parameter type that indicates
that the parameter is not evaluated immediately:
sub infix:!! ($lsh, $rhs is deferred) {...}
If the sta
On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Cal Henderson wrote:
> patch to correct typos in rx.ops
>
> patch follows sig
>
Thanks, applied.
Simon
--- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But what to do about matrix arithmetic and other simple threadable
> > tasks?
> >
> > sub m_add(@a, @b) {
> > my @result;
> > my $i, $j;
> > @result = @a;
> > for @result -> $i {:is threaded # Thread this block?
> > for @result[$i]; @b -> $j;
--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > But what to do about matrix arithmetic and other simple
> > > threadable tasks?
> > > sub m_add(@a, @b) { my @result; my $i, $j; @result = @a;
> > > for @result -> $i {:is threaded # Thread this block
> Paul wrote:
> > --- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>Dave Whipp wrote:
> >>
> >>>Joe Gottman wrote:
> >
> >
> > Getting deep -- sorry. :)
> >
> >
> Alternatively, there might be a new parameter type that indicates
> that the parameter is not evaluated immediately:
>
This is a big long post containing essentially me scratching my head at
Luke's code. Since Uri asked yesterday for a tutorial-type explanation
of some of the syntax, and since I wanted to scream and ask the same
thing of Luke today when I first read his "5 unobfuscated friggin
lines", I'm putting i
--- Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Paul wrote:
> > > --- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>Dave Whipp wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Joe Gottman wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Getting deep -- sorry. :)
> > >
> > >
> > Alternatively, there might be a new parameter type tha
Edward Peschko wrote:
What I think you're looking for is the fact that they're not regexes any more. They are > "rexen", but in horrifying-secret-reality, what has happened is that Larry's decided
to move Fortran out of core, and replace it with yacc.
just an aside, and a bit off-topic, but h
>making *productions* of strings/sounds/whatever that could possibly
>match the regular expression?
>
>>Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this the :any switch of apoc 5?
>>http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2002/06/26/synopsis5.html
Not really, unless the input string is infinite! :any returns all
subst
- Original Message -
From: "Luke Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: Short-circuiting user-defined operators
> > Paul wrote:
> > > --- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >>Dave W
Joe Gottman wrote:
There are two reasonable semantics for deferred parameters:
1) lazy evaluation with caching, where the evaluation of the
actual expression in the call is deferred until the sub
actauly makes use of it and the result is then cached and
reused as necessary. Any side effects happ
Larry Wall writes:
>
> Er, how would LEAVE detect that this was the *last* time you're ever
> going to call this routine?
>
> On the other hand, if we renamed FIRST and LAST to ENTER and LEAVE,
> then FIRST would become available to mean "my very first time"...
>
and LAST will mean "just
> What I think you're looking for is the fact that they're not regexes any more. They
> are > "rexen", but in horrifying-secret-reality, what has happened is that Larry's
> decided
> to move Fortran out of core, and replace it with yacc.
just an aside, and a bit off-topic, but has anybody consid
> just an aside, and a bit off-topic, but has anybody considered
> hijacking the regular expression engine in perl6 and turning it into
> its opposite, namely making *productions* of strings/sounds/whatever
> that could possibly match the regular expression? ie:
>
> a*
>
> producing
>
> ''
> a
>
--- arcadi shehter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry Wall writes:
> >
> > Er, how would LEAVE detect that this was the *last* time you're
> > ever going to call this routine?
> >
> > On the other hand, if we renamed FIRST and LAST to ENTER and
> > LEAVE, then FIRST would become available
--- Edward Peschko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What I think you're looking for is the fact that they're not
> regexes any more. They are > "rexen", but in
> horrifying-secret-reality, what has happened is that Larry's decided
> > to move Fortran out of core, and replace it with yacc.
>
> just a
On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:29:37AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
This has been alluded to before.
What would /A*B*/ produce?
Because if you were just processing the rex, I think you'd have to
finish generating all possibilities of A* before you began iterating
over B*...
The "proper" way would be
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 07:29:37AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
>> >This has been alluded to before.
>> >
>> >What would /A*B*/ produce?
>> >
>> >Because if you were just processing the rex, I think you'd have to
>> >finish generating all possibilities o
John Williams wrote:
>On Tue, 1 Apr 2003, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>> So I *really* don't think comparing the equality of references will be
>> a good idea, in P6.
> The main point is that the
> reference is a unique identifier for an object. At least, I haven't been
> able to think why it wouldn'
28 matches
Mail list logo
