On Sep 24, 2005, at 6:36, Ross McFarland wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005, at 10:51 PM, Ross McFarland wrote:
i was playing around with NCI stuff tonight and ran across a problem
in loadlib. the following code does not work:
for those of you interested:
https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.
Hi all,
After some thinking it occured to me that the current way of defining
.chars, .bytes and .elems (and whatever else there are) doesn't make any
sense to me. In pugs at least they currently return the amount of units
in question - in any context! Why not define .chars like this:
Context
wolverian skribis 2005-09-24 13:45 (+0300):
> Why not define .chars like this:
> Context Return value
> itemamount of units
> listunits themselves
Agreed, of course.
> Originally I thought that .elems and .chars were symmetric and both
> should behave the same sema
Hashes are full of convenience, and Huffman would be proud:
%hash.keys %hash>>.key
%hash.values%hash>>.value
%hash.kvzip(%hash.keys, %hash.values)
One thing occurred to me: if hashes are worth all this, then why not
abbreviate "keys" further to "k" (as in "kv"), and "
> "J" == Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
J> Hashes are full of convenience, and Huffman would be proud:
J> %hash.keys %hash>>.key
J> %hash.values%hash>>.value
J> %hash.kvzip(%hash.keys, %hash.values)
J> One thing occurred to me: if hashes are worth al
Uri Guttman skribis 2005-09-24 10:37 (-0400):
> huffman has its limits too. in general having single letter names for
> anything is a poor idea. it makes it hard to search for, you limit it to
> only one thing that can use that letter, it isn't always easy to
> remember what a given letter is, etc.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On Saturday 24 September 2005 00:15, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 07:33:04PM +0200, Tels wrote:
> > Not yet. Good idea. The relevant code is in parse_file() in gen_graph
> > - it gets as option one .pm file and then does something wit
On Sep 24, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2005, at 6:36, Ross McFarland wrote:
On Sep 22, 2005, at 10:51 PM, Ross McFarland wrote:
i was playing around with NCI stuff tonight and ran across a
problem in loadlib. the following code does not work:
for those of
On Sep 24, 2005, at 17:30, Ross McFarland wrote:
On Sep 24, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
- I don't understand the extra check:
+if (path)
+goto done;
extra as in one last or extra as in why i'm checking at all?
The test 'if (path)'. Before that is an 'if' t
On Sep 24, 2005, at 9:04 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2005, at 17:30, Ross McFarland wrote:
On Sep 24, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
- I don't understand the extra check:
+if (path)
+goto done;
extra as in one last or extra as in why i'm checki
I have released "Amber for Parrot" version 0.2.3a (Ashes):
Downloads: http://xamber.org/download.html
Release history: http://xamber.org/history.html
Project home page: http://xamber.org/index.html
"Amber for Parrot" is an Eiffel-like scripting language for the Parrot
Virtual Machine.
Changes si
From: Ross McFarland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2005 08:30:23 -0700
On Sep 24, 2005, at 4:59 AM, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> On Sep 24, 2005, at 6:36, Ross McFarland wrote:
. . .
>>
>> i'll work on porting the pir to a .t test at some point if that
>> would
12 matches
Mail list logo
