Larry Wall wrote:
> A multi sub presents only an MMD interface, while a multi method presents
> both MMD and SMD interfaces. In this case, there's not much point in the
> SMD inteface since .. used as infix is always going to call the MMD interface.
So:
multi method : MMD and SMD
multi sub: M
We were discussing some confusing macro behaviours, when we came upon
this curious thing. This code is really simple in p5, as it doesn't
really have separate compilation, but in p6, the modules can be pre-
compiled or cached.
8<--
module ImportHeadache;
my $m;
sub im
One way to think of your macro example (instead of the ->import one,
which is harder to define, i think):
Every time you use a module it's used by the compiler, and by the
emitted code.
The compiler loads the macros, the emitted code loads the non-macro
stuff.
Since the clsoure is created in the
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 15:13:07 +0200, Zohar Kelrich wrote:
> We were discussing some confusing macro behaviours, when we came upon this
> curious thing. This code is really simple in p5, as it doesn't really have
> separate compilation, but in p6, the modules can be pre- compiled or cached.
>
On 3/2/06, Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Can subs be declared within classes? Can methods be declared without
> classes? If the answers to both of these questions are "no", then it
> occurs to me that you _could_ unify the two under a single name, using
> the class boundary as the di
On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Steve Peters wrote:
> Thanks to the work that's already been done, it was very easy to get NetBSD up
> and running. The attached patch is all that's needed to add NetBSD support to
> Parrot.
I don't know the answer myself, but I was wondering: Have all the various
*BSD dist
Stevan Little wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> > Can subs be declared within classes? Can methods be declared without
> > classes?
>
> I would say "yes".
>
> Having subs inside classes makes creating small utility functions
> easier. You could also use private methods for this, but if I dont
> need
I did some experimenting yesterday with CPAN::Mini::Inject and our
Subversion repository:
As many of you know, in the Subversion source control system every
file has a URL - it can be a file:// url, an http:// URL, an svn://
URL, etc.
I think what will work well for us is to use CPAN::Mi
On Mar 1, 2006, at 7:36 PM, Kirrily Robert wrote:
In my experience developers latch on to test-driven development
like a crack habit because once they get into the swing of it, it
really is a very effective, stress-reducing way to work.
That was one of the really surprising (pleasantly so)
On Mar 1, 2006, at 12:35 AM, Jeffrey Thalhammer wrote:
...
This trend is being driven by a "flight to quality"
among software consumers.
...
Jeff I think that is a good theory - I mean, it is a testable theory.
I hope it is true, but I am not sure. I suggest you interview a few
IT ma
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 09:31:04AM -0500, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Steve Peters wrote:
>
> > Thanks to the work that's already been done, it was very easy to get NetBSD
> > up
> > and running. The attached patch is all that's needed to add NetBSD support
> > to
> > Parrot.
>
On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 09:46:42AM -0800, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 12:57:24AM +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
> > On Feb 24, 2006, at 0:23, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> > >>[...]
> > >I've just committed an update (r11722) that eliminates PGE's
> > >use of save/restore opcodes
On 3/2/06, Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stevan Little wrote:
> > Jonathan Lang wrote:
> > > Can subs be declared within classes? Can methods be declared without
> > > classes?
> >
> > I would say "yes".
> >
> > Having subs inside classes makes creating small utility functions
> > eas
Stevan Little wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> > Steven Little wrote:
> > > $object does unattached_method;
> > > ^Object does unattached_method;
> >
> > (Wouldn't that be "^$object does unattached_method;"?)
>
> No, I am attaching the method (well role really) to the class ^Object.
> There is no su
Matisse Enzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeff I think that is a good theory - I mean, it is a testable theory.
> I hope it is true, but I am not sure. I suggest you interview a few
> IT managers - come up with a list of 6 questions and ask them to
> answer in email - I can introduce you to
ANNOUNCE - p5 based p6 compiler
The implementation is under way, but it is already runnable!
link:
http://svn.openfoundry.org/pugs/misc/pX/Common/
instructions:
- download all files like iterator_engine_*
- run:
perl iterator_engine_p6compiler.pl iterator_engine_p6sample.p6
- the first run w
16 matches
Mail list logo
