chromatic wrote:
On Friday 07 April 2006 10:48, demerphq wrote:
On 4/7/06, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
eval { dereference_somehow( $thingie ) }
Sure, thats what i was saying elsewhere too. But I dont consider that
a reasonable solution. Consider if dreferencing it means executing
Folks,
This is a poetic quine (or quine-maker) in perl5.
open myself, $0 and print ;
The same thing in perl6 would be:
my $self = open $*PROGRAM_NAME; for =$self { say }
or
my $self = open $*PROGRAM_NAME; say for =$self;
or
my $self = slurp $*PROGRAM_NAME; print $self;
or even
Dan Kogai wrote:
With that understood, I would welcome if we have a version of slurp()
which unconditionally returns a scalar.
That'd be:
~slurp $file;
:-)
Damian
Larry Wall schreef:
> before anyone else points it out to me
> I think the long-dot
> rule is built into the parser rather than falling out of the
> longest-token rule.
I think so too, but why then cling to the dot?
s:p5/[\][#][^\]*[#][\]// (does not match \#\ )
The backslash is no
Larry wrote:
I really prefer the form where .#() looks like a no-op method call,
and can provide the visual dot for a postfix extender. It also is
somewhat less likely to happen by accident the #., I think. And I
think the front-end shape of .# is more recognizable as different
from #, while #
On Apr 08, 2006, at 18:45 , Damian Conway wrote:
Dan Kogai wrote:
With that understood, I would welcome if we have a version of slurp
() which unconditionally returns a scalar.
That'd be:
~slurp $file;
:-)
Very clever. But still not good enough when it comes to autoboxing.
On Apr 08, 2006, at 19:34 , Dan Kogai wrote:
does not. The problem of ~stringify, ?boolify, and +numify is that
they are infix operators so it goes the opposite direction.
s/infix/prefix/
Sorry.
Dan the Perl6 Golfer on the Bunker
Dan Kogai wrote:
~slurp $file;
Very clever. But still not good enough when it comes to autoboxing.
{ ~slurp }($*PROGRAM_NAME).print
and even
(~slurp $*PROGRAM_NAME).print
works as expected but since "~slurp $file" is really ~(slurp $file),
$*PROGRAM_NAME.~slurp.print
does not.
Adam Kennedy wrote:
HOWEVER, that requires that they NOT be using a custom extension, and
than the commands used in the Makefile.PL match those in the current
version of Module::Install.
This has caused a couple of bug reports against PAR distributions with
old/broken MI's where the person in
Folks,
With Perl6, we have singleton methods as
$me.meta.add_method(me => sub{ ... });
But is there a way to, say, add methods within lexical scope?
Take URI on Perl 5. URI behaves both as an object
my $uri = URI->new("http://dev.perl.org/perl6/";);
print $uri->path; # "/perl6/"
But it als
On 4/8/06 6:29 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> I'm not enamoured of the .# I must confess. Nor of the #. either.
Thank goodness...I was beginning to think it was only me!
> Though, frankly, every one of the alternatives proposed so far is so ugly that
> I seriously doubt that anyone will actually want
chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If it's really big, we can find a website to host it for a while.
I put the result of doing cpd on parrot/src/*.c:
http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/cpd_12139.txt
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 10:00:05AM -0400, Sean Sieger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I put the result of doing cpd on parrot/src/*.c:
>
> http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/cpd_12139.txt
This is cool! Thanks for doing it.
Can you rerun it without the files that are apparently intentionally
dup
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Lester) writes:
> This is cool! Thanks for doing it.
My pleasure -- I am looking for a way to contribute.
> Can you rerun it without the files that are apparently intentionally
> dupes of each other? For example, there's jit_cpu.c and exec_cpu.c, and
> apparently are exa
David Landgren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Steve Peters wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 04:52:18PM +0100, David Landgren wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>>> /eg scripts are a nice "hands-on" way of finding out how a module works
>>> in real life.
>>>
>>> No distribution should be without one!
>>>
>>
>> Unle
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 11:40:33AM -0400, Sean Sieger ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Certainly; but I have a question -- originating in my first view of cpd
> results, those of httpd hosted at pmd.sourceforge.net -- are the dupes
> that are 'waste' only the ones found in one file? Or, maybe better fo
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 12:13:27PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 11:40:33AM -0400, Sean Sieger ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > Certainly; but I have a question -- originating in my first view of cpd
> > results, those of httpd hosted at pmd.sourceforge.net -- are the dupes
>
At 08:38 -0400 8/4/06, John Siracusa wrote:
On 4/8/06 6:29 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
I'm not enamoured of the .# I must confess. Nor of the #. either.
Thank goodness...I was beginning to think it was only me!
For the record, I agree with both of you, and that your proposed
alternatives are
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Maybe it's better to run it on a fresh checkout of the parrot source code,
> rather than a built tree.
And this is that result:
http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/cpd_12143.txt
Is there public access to the synopses at svn or cvs?
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 03:22:15PM -0400, Sean Sieger wrote:
> Is there public access to the synopses at svn or cvs?
If you're just looking for read-only access, see
http://svn.perl.org/perl6/doc/trunk
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 03:22:15PM -0400, Sean Sieger wrote:
>> Is there public access to the synopses at svn or cvs?
>
> If you're just looking for read-only access, see
> http://svn.perl.org/perl6/doc/trunk
Thank you, yes, I guess I should have
% svn co http://svn.perl.org/perl6/doc/trunk synopses
On Apr 8, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Sean Sieger wrote:
Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 03:22:15PM -0400, Sean Sieger wrote:
Is there public access to the synopses at svn or cvs?
If you're just looking for
Will Coleda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> % svn co http://svn.perl.org/perl6/doc/trunk synopses
Thank you.
On Apr 8, 2006, at 9:00 AM, Sean Sieger wrote:
chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If it's really big, we can find a website to host it for a while.
I put the result of doing cpd on parrot/src/*.c:
http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/cpd_12139.txt
Thanks for doing this. Can you do it
Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for doing this. Can you do it without the autogenerated files
> in there? Those, I expect to have duplicated code.
As soon as I found the autogenerated files, I thought, 'aren't these
( http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/12143.txt )
the ones
Sean Sieger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ( http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/12143.txt )
sorry,
http://mysite.verizon.net/sean.sieger/cpd_12143.txt
From: Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 15:24:27 -0700
In: docs/pdds/clip/pddXX_exceptions.pod
As with the I/O PDD, this isn't a final form, it's just a draft to
seed discussion. What's missing? What's inaccurate? What's accurate
for the current state
28 matches
Mail list logo
