On July 14th Yuval Kogman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 11:42:24 +0100, Smylers wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid I still don't get it.
> >
> > Or rather, while I can manage to read an explanation of what one of
> > these operators does and see how it applies to the variables in the
> > examples next t
At 8:16 PM -0500 8/12/06, Andy Lester wrote:
I've written up some stuff about why consting is good. It's in the
Parrot repository as cage/consting.pod.
Inspired by Andy's consting work, and xmath's Data::Alias, I've
created Data::Reuse, which allows you to easily const data structures
*and*
On Aug 13, 2006, at 5:57 AM, Johan Vromans wrote:
You don't want to be able to do C, right?
No, but C
yeah yeah, I knew when I wrote that that SOME smart aleck would point
that out. :-)
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
On Aug 13, 2006, at 7:05 AM, Paul Johnson wrote:
Very much so. s/constants/contents/ I suspect? Or maybe s/its
constants/what
it points to/ ?
Ooops, thanks.
I also added a few sentences and an example on cdecl.
--
Andy Lester => [EMAIL PROTECTED] => www.petdance.com => AIM:petdance
In my experience, the hypothetical errors the compiler will
catch for you are almost totally nonexistant,
In my experience, it's the not catching existing errors, but
preventing you from doing stupid stuff going forward.
Possibly relevant questions: How many man hours have just
been spent
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 08:16:10PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
> I've written up some stuff about why consting is good. It's in the
> Parrot repository as cage/consting.pod.
>
> To my old p5p homies: I send this to you so you don't forget about
> consting while I'm working over here in Parrotl
Andy Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> const int days_per_month[] =
> { 31, 28, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31, 31, 30, 31, 30, 31 };
>
> You don't want to be able to do C, right?
No, but C
On 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
At 5:25 PM -0700 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
I'm wondering if it would not be inappropriate to change the name
Str to something more descriptive of its content within the
historical or current wider context.
... I have evolved my thoughts to accept that Str i
Hello, everyone~
S04 doesn't explain the running order between the traits blocks FIRST,
ENTER, NEXT, LEAVE, and LAST. So I couldn't be sure whether or not my
tests in the Pugs test suit are correct. Please check out the
following test file, which also servers as the first sketch of my
proposal:
Hi, there~
While I was adding tests to t/syntax/comments.t in the Pugs test suit
this afternoon, I suddenly came up with this form of embedded
comments:
my $foo = #\ (this is a comment) 42;
is $foo, 42;
Now that we have the excellent unspace rule, why can't we use it
consistently with t
On 8/13/06, Smylers wrote:
Please could the proponets of the various behaviours being discussed
here share a few more concrete examples which start by explaning a
scenario in which there is a desire to do something, preferably one
that Perl 5 coders can identify with, and then show how on
Way back on 7/14/06, Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 10:19:24PM -0600, David Green wrote:
[...]
No, === is also deep. It's only shallower (or potentially shallower)
in the sense that it treats any mutable object node as a leaf node
rather than changing to "snapshot" semantics like e
I can't resist putting on my surly curmudgeon hat to disagree
about the value of "const".
In my experience, the hypothetical errors the compiler will
catch for you are almost totally nonexistant, yet the work
of complying with the A-R compilers nit-picking is a constant
(heh!) drain or resources t
At 10:35 AM -0600 8/13/06, David Green wrote:
On 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
I thought your reasons made sense, and would be happy with a "Text"
type, although I don't especially object to "Str" -- as you say,
it's probably good enough given ordinary programming usage.
However the IRC ex
It turns out that, if you use a magic number right now, you can modify the
paths Parrot uses to load libraries. I found two problems doing so, which
the attached test and code patch addresses.
First, Parrot assumed that all include paths were relative. That's no good,
but it was easy to fix.
15 matches
Mail list logo
