HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
Um, I always thought that "is reserved" in a spec means "we don't have
the foggiest idea what we'll do with this, but we have a suspicion
that if we let people use this particular thing right now, we'll
regret it someday."
OK, but how official is theory.pod? I mean is
On Feb 23, 2006, at 5:06, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
PGE does not expect that a sub will restore the state of the user
stack, but it does expect that *coroutines* get their own copy of
the user stack, and that calling/returning from a coroutine will
not affect the current user stack. This expe
Author: autrijus
Date: Wed Feb 22 11:01:51 2006
New Revision: 7784
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
* S12: replace the inaccurate use "eigenclass" with "metaclass"
* Also specify "$.foo" and "$.foo(...)" forms as contextful
shorthands of method calls on self.
Modified: doc/trunk/d
If you're going to have versions of sqrt in S29 that deal with Complex
numbers, you ought to do likewise with a number of other functions:
multi sub abs (: Complex ?$x = $CALLER::_ ) returns Num
should return the magnitude of a complex number. abs($x) :=
$x.magnitude, or whatever the appropriat
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> . . .
> -Such an "eigenmethod" is delegated to C<.meta> just as method like
> . . .
> +Such an I is always delegated to C<.meta> just as
changing "eigenmethod" to I should also change "an"
to "a":
+Such a I is always delegated to C<.meta> just as
^
Small
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 06:08:40AM -0800, Paul Hodges wrote:
:
:
: --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: > . . .
: > -Such an "eigenmethod" is delegated to C<.meta> just as method like
: > . . .
: > +Such an I is always delegated to C<.meta> just as
:
: changing "eigenmethod" to I should also change "a
Author: larry
Date: Thu Feb 23 06:15:20 2006
New Revision: 7795
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
Typo, plus audrey forgot to increment version.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 02:15:21PM -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
> ==
> --- doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod (original)
> +++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod Thu Feb 23 06:15:2
On 23 Feb 2006 14:15:21 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Log:
> Typo, plus audrey forgot to increment version.
There seems to be another typo on the same line: "just as method like"
instead of "just as methods like".
Aankhen
--
"Why don't you go on a diet!"
"Because I like to eat! Is that a crime?"
Author: autrijus
Date: Thu Feb 23 13:25:31 2006
New Revision: 7812
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S11.pod
Log:
* S11: Inner modules can now decalare "is export" as well;
exports are now collected with the inner ::EXPORT module,
with tagsets as inner modules within it; "use" can now
re-exp
Author: autrijus
Date: Thu Feb 23 13:35:36 2006
New Revision: 7814
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S11.pod
Log:
* S11 typo fix and version bump.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S11.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S11.pod
> +use Sense :EXPORT<@horse>; # import "common" but exports
> # "@horse"
As typos seem to be in favour today, might I suggest s/exports/export/
so all the verbs agree in number? Apologies for the short context but I
had enough of a fight with the wrapp
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:37:00AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
>
> On Feb 23, 2006, at 5:06, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> >PGE does not expect that a sub will restore the state of the user
> >stack, but it does expect that *coroutines* get their own copy of
> >the user stack, and that calling/ret
On Feb 24, 2006, at 0:23, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
[...]
Well, there are two issues involved with the user stack:
* do we really need it / want it / keep it [1]
* if so, how are the semantics across sub calls or for coros
I've just committed an update (r11722) that eliminates PGE's
use of sa
Author: autrijus
Date: Thu Feb 23 17:02:39 2006
New Revision: 7831
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S11.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
* S11: fix another typo. Typo`R`us.
* S12: remove the remaining "eigenclass" misnomer when it means "metaclass".
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S11.pod
According to the revised Synopsis 6, named subroutines can have one of three
forms:
my RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# lexical only
our RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# also package-scoped
sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# same as "
From: "Patrick R. Michaud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 22:06:22 -0600
. . .
PGE does not expect that a sub will restore the state of the user
stack, but it does expect that *coroutines* get their own copy of
the user stack, and that calling/returning from a corout
Joe Gottman asked:
my RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# lexical only
our RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# also package-scoped
sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# same as "our"
Note that the third possibility here does not include a return type. Doe
On 2/24/06, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. One of the available TRAITS is C. So you can always
> specify a "postfix" return type, even without a declarator:
>
> sub data() returns Str {...}
>
> The declarator is only needed if you want to "prefix" your return type
> (presuma
19 matches
Mail list logo
