On Jun 14, 2005, at 1:32 PM, Kevin Scaldeferri wrote:
A little more interesting information. I ran a coverage test for the
full code base. Then I did this:
[kevin]% time perl -MDevel::Cover -e 1
...
perl -MDevel::Cover -e 1 14.19s user 0.88s system 79% cpu 18.997 total
After spending a
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
... I.e., I'd like to be able to do something along
the lines of:
.sub main @MAIN
$P99 = newclass "Foo"
$S0 = ".sub h @ANON\nprint \"Hello\"\n.end\n"
$P0 = compreg "PIR"
$P1 = compile $P0, $S0
store_global "Foo", "hello",
Hi,
I think, that David's version is matches with my opinion. I don't think,
that "beginners" would be a better name for it, but maybe more
practical, as it's a more evident name.
Bye,
Andras
David Storrs wrote:
On Jun 15, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
And here they are...
Hi,
Hi,
I think, that David's version is matches with my opinion. I don't
think, that "beginners" would be a better name for it, but maybe more
practical, as it's a more evident name.
Hmmm, I think "beginner" is a little negative. What about professional
Perl5 programmers, who wish to lear
Hi,
Fagyal Csongor wrote:
I think, that David's version is matches with my opinion. I don't
think, that "beginners" would be a better name for it, but maybe more
practical, as it's a more evident name.
Hmmm, I think "beginner" is a little negative. What about professional
Perl5 programmers,
Currently in Pugs &*zip has no signature -- it simply rewrites its
arguments into the listfix ￥ (i.e. Y) function.
That is bad because it can't be introspected, and you can't define
something like that yourself. It also makes it uncompilable to Parrot
as I don't control the runloop there. :)
Als
Sorry for answering so late...
On 6/8/05, Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> jerry gay wrote:
> > i'm no gc expert, but here's my comments after discussions with
> > alexandre on #parrot.
> >
> > On 6/8/05, Alexandre Buisse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > since threading issues haven't
Share & Enjoy: http://use.perl.org/~chip/journal/25234
If only use.perl didn't make me compose my HTML in a window about two
inches square, it'd be great. OK, I could compose and cut&paste, but
where's the fun in that?
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 05:40:31PM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: Currently in Pugs &*zip has no signature -- it simply rewrites its
: arguments into the listfix ￥ (i.e. Y) function.
:
: That is bad because it can't be introspected, and you can't define
: something like that yourself. It also make
Say I have a class method in FooClass, callable as FooClass.greet():
method greet(Class $class: ) {
say "Hello, FooClass!";
}
AFAIK, this is the only signature that would work for making &greet a
class method; but note that I'm not using $class, and I'd expect the
compiler to is
[Sent off-group by mistake. On #perl6 the impression was that now Pipe
is becoming a Role for things that can lazily be read from; and thus any
filehandle or lazy list fulfills them. Larry, please help us understand
if this is the case.]
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 08:53:41AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
Larry Wall writes:
> This does imply that we can pipe into a subscript somehow.
Why? Or rather, why is that desirable?
> If we choose something like () for our placeholder meaning "pipe into
> this location", then
>
> @[EMAIL PROTECTED]; @b; @c]
>
> is the same as
>
> @foo[()] <== @a
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 07:24:42PM +0300, Gaal Yahas wrote:
: [Sent off-group by mistake. On #perl6 the impression was that now Pipe
: is becoming a Role for things that can lazily be read from; and thus any
: filehandle or lazy list fulfills them. Larry, please help us understand
: if this is the
On 6/16/05, Gaal Yahas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Say I have a class method in FooClass, callable as FooClass.greet():
>
> method greet(Class $class: ) {
> say "Hello, FooClass!";
> }
Aside from the fact that I don't think this is the right way to
specify class methods...
> A
my $x = 3;
my $y = \$x;
say $y + 10;
$y++;
say $y;
say $x;
Currently in Pugs they print:
13
4
3
Is this sane? What is the scalar reference's semantics in face of a
stringification and numification? I assume that array/hash references
simply pass on to the t
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 01:26:31PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > Say I have a class method in FooClass, callable as FooClass.greet():
> >
> > method greet(Class $class: ) {
> > say "Hello, FooClass!";
> > }
>
> Aside from the fact that I don't think this is the right way to
> sp
Larry Wall wrote:
You must
specify @foo[[;[EMAIL PROTECTED] or @foo[()] <== @bar to get the special mark.
I'm uncomfortable with the specific syntax of @a[()] because generated
code might sometimes want to generate an empty list, and special-casing
that sort of thing is always a pain (and f
Gaal Yahas wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 01:26:31PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
Say I have a class method in FooClass, callable as FooClass.greet():
method greet(Class $class: ) {
say "Hello, FooClass!";
}
Aside from the fact that I don't think this is the right way to
specify
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 01:05:22PM -0700, Dave Whipp wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > You must
: >specify @foo[[;[EMAIL PROTECTED] or @foo[()] <== @bar to get the special
mark.
:
: I'm uncomfortable with the specific syntax of @a[()] because generated
: code might sometimes want to generate an em
On 6/16/05, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I think that subs and methods *should* complain about all unused
> non-optional parameters *except* invocants.
This brings up something I've been thinking about. I sometimes write a
method in Perl 5 that does something or other and then c
On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 07:05:11AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
> Gaal Yahas wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 01:26:31PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> >>>Say I have a class method in FooClass, callable as FooClass.greet():
> >>>method greet(Class $class: ) {
> >>> say "Hello, FooClass!";
>
Patrick wrote:
Somehow I read these as though the original poster was correct --
i.e., one creates a class method for FooClass as either
method greet(Class $class:) { say "Hello!"; }
Yes. That will work, but it's not the recommended solution.
or
method greet(FooClass $class:) { sa
So, I was about to write the following test for Pugs:
sub factorial (Int $n) {
my sub factn (Int $acc, $i) {
return $acc if $i > $n;
factn( $acc * $i, $i+1);
}
factn(1, 1);
}
When I thought to check the apocalypses and exegeses and, what do you know, I
couldn't find an
On 6/16/05, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, I was about to write the following test for Pugs:
>
> sub factorial (Int $n) {
> my sub factn (Int $acc, $i) {
> return $acc if $i > $n;
> factn( $acc * $i, $i+1);
> }
> factn(1, 1);
> }
>
> When I thought to ch
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 6/16/05, Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So, I was about to write the following test for Pugs:
>>
>> sub factorial (Int $n) {
>> my sub factn (Int $acc, $i) {
>> return $acc if $i > $n;
>> factn( $acc * $i, $i+1);
>> }
On 6/16/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Or maybe a splat
>
> @foo[*]
>
> Or go with the parens with something in them to indicate the positive
> absence of something.
>
> @foo[(*)]
>
> Anyone else want to have a go at this bikeshed?
You know, before I read this part of the
Suppose I have a simple, single argument recursive function:
sub factorial (Int $n) {
return 1 if $n == 0;
return $n * factorial $n;
}
Can I write that as:
sub factorial (Int $n:) {
return 1 when 0;
return $n * factorial $n;
}
NB. Yes, I know it's a pathological example.
On Thursday 09 June 2005 12:21, John Macdonald wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 09, 2005 at 06:41:55PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandla
�" wrote:
> > Edward Cherlin wrote:
> > >That means that we have to straighten out the functions
> > > that can return either a Boolean or an item of the
> > > argument type. Compar
28 matches
Mail list logo
