for loop list of lists: flattening arguments to pointy sub

Flattening argument lists is not yet working in Pugs, so I can't easily play around with this one, hence this question. In Pugs, you can process a simple list of lists like this: my @lol = ( [ '1a', '1b' ], [ '2a', '2b' ], [ '3a', '3b' ] ); for @lol -> $t { say "1st='$t[0]' 2nd='$t[1]'" } Yet th

$Ignore_Exitcode in Test-Harness

Hi all! In Test::Harness, one can find the following statement: # Some experimental versions of OS/2 build have broken $? my $Ignore_Exitcode = $ENV{HARNESS_IGNORE_EXITCODE}; However: shlomi:~/Download/unpack/Test-Harness-2.56$ grep -rE 'Ignore|IGNORE' . ./lib/Test/Harness.pm:my

Re: for loop list of lists: flattening arguments to pointy sub

Hi, Andrew Savige wrote: > In Pugs, you can process a simple list of lists like this: > > my @lol = ( [ '1a', '1b' ], [ '2a', '2b' ], [ '3a', '3b' ] ); > for @lol -> $t { say "1st='$t[0]' 2nd='$t[1]'" } > > Yet the $t[0] and $t[1] look untidy to me, so I'd prefer to specify > that the for closur

Re: binding arguments

Hi, Juerd wrote: > The next thing I thought was: hey, argument *passing* is actually > *binding* to variables in the sub, so why not use the := operator? > That works very well, because binding as an expression makes no sense > anyway, it being a language thing. And luckily, named arguments are >

The --perl switch [was Re: $Ignore_Exitcode in Test-Harness]

Hi all! Replying to myself, I should note that I found another problem in Test::Harness. Reading from the Test::Harness man page: http://xrl.us/jb6q < =item C Usually your tests will be run by C<$^X>, the currently-executing Perl. However, you may want to have it run by a different

How to use Devel::Cover?

Hi , I am new to use Devel::Cover. We have lots of product Perl modules in our product "lib" folder and we have lots of Perl test scripts to cover those modules, right now, we are trying to get the code coverage metrics for our tests on those modules. I find we might get help by using Devel::C

A couple of questions

Hi People, When you use $P0 = compreg, "PIR" is there any way to get an optimizing compiler ( or not ) or do you always get a version that follows the flags that were passed to Parrot? Is there any implementation of the Perl pack/unpack functions planned or should we be using the Struct PMC? Whe

Re: A couple of questions

On Dec 25, 2005, at 23:48, Steve Gunnell wrote: Hi People, When you use $P0 = compreg, "PIR" is there any way to get an optimizing compiler ( or not ) or do you always get a version that follows the flags that were passed to Parrot? Currently you can't pass any more arguments (like runcore o

Re: How to use Devel::Cover?

Scott Wang wrote: Hi , I am new to use Devel::Cover. We have lots of product Perl modules in our product "lib" folder and we have lots of Perl test scripts to cover those modules, right now, we are trying to get the code coverage metrics for our tests on those modules. I find we might get hel

Re: Iterating over complex structures

On 12/22/05, Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Suppose I want to navigate a tree and print out info contained in each of > its leaves along with info gathered from the position in the tree of the > list itself? Can I do it in a "universal" manner as hinted above that > would work for other

Re: $Ignore_Exitcode in Test-Harness

On Sun, Dec 25, 2005 at 01:46:21PM +0200, Shlomi Fish ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > # Some experimental versions of OS/2 build have broken $? > my $Ignore_Exitcode = $ENV{HARNESS_IGNORE_EXITCODE}; > > Meaning, that neaither the environment variable nor the variable that has > been > as

Re: The --perl switch [was Re: $Ignore_Exitcode in Test-Harness]

On Sun, Dec 25, 2005 at 10:49:28PM +0200, Shlomi Fish ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > However prove does not have a "--perl" switch: Fixed in Test::Harness 2.57_01. Thanks. xoxo, Andy -- Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance