--- Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Then again, there are some very talented people
> with a lot of free
> > time in the Perl community; I wouldn't count it
> out.
>
> That looked to me like a "Damian troll", hoping that
> DC wou
I was reading through E6 again, and noticed something a little
troubling:
sub part ([EMAIL PROTECTED] is rw) {...}
Well, I @_ C! Otherwise we wouldn't be able to
C things off of it. What was actually meant, I presume, is:
sub part ([EMAIL PROTECTED] of (Object is rw)) {...} #[1]
Or s
On Fri, Sep 12, 2003 at 10:29:04AM +0300, Vladimir Lipskiy wrote:
> > People make mistakes. Perhaps you should produce some errors if a user
> > strays outside these rules. Garbage in, garbage out: Bad. Garbage in,
> > error out: Good.
>
> It really does that. I mean that it returns a "" when i
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 08:40:44PM -0400, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
>> When there are no events queued, for any thread, then we change "branch
>> e_handler_foo" back into "branch label_foo", for speed.
> Do we need to do this last bit explicitly? Or can
> Are you saying:
>
> concat_dirnames("C:\foo", "bar") == error?
Yes. Even if the file spec tool was smart enough just like you and me
it would never be able to unriddle what output it would have to produce
as a result of the following call on Mac:
concat_dirnames("disk:dir_a", "dir_b");
if "dis
On Thursday, Sep 11, 2003, at 16:38 Europe/London, Ovid wrote:
--- Andrew Savige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oh, that 'grind' looks like a very handy command but I'm a bit
confused about how you use it. Is it just a handy general-purpose
command or do you use it specifically as part of "make te
5.8.1 recently started failing 2 tests in op/cproto.t, on pop(), shift();
this only happens on one box, ie RH-7.2, not RH-9, and I havent tried
a make distclean, so I havent reported it to p5p.
Instead I decided that some false laziness was in order, and I should go
digging.
But, I thought it wo
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Next Apocalypse is objects, and that'll take time.
Objects are *worth* more time than a lot of the other topics.
Arguably, they're just as important as subroutines, in a modern
language.
Speaking of objects... are we going to have a built-in object fo
Jonadab the Unsightly One writes:
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Next Apocalypse is objects, and that'll take time.
>
> Objects are *worth* more time than a lot of the other topics.
> Arguably, they're just as important as subroutines, in a modern
> language.
>
> Speaking of o
On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Also, the "standard library", however large or small that will be, will
> definitely be mutable at runtime. There'll be none of that Java "you
> can't subclass String, because we think you shouldn't" crap.
Java's standard class library is a mishmash of th
Ovid wrote:
> I've just made it available at
> http://users.easystreet.com/ovid/cgi_course/downloads/grind.gz
>
> It needs more work, including allowing descending into directories (via
> File::Find or a similar mechanism) and having pre and post actions.
> I haven't figured out the best way to do
11 matches
Mail list logo
