# New Ticket Created by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Please include the string: [perl #40316]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=40316 >
Hi there
Based on a leo's conversation on the IRC (it's all in the script docs) I
Parrot Bug Summary
http://rt.perl.org/rt3/NoAuth/parrot/Overview.html
Generated at Mon Sep 11 13:15:04 2006 GMT
---
* Numbers
* New Issues
* Overview of Open Issues
* Ticket Status By Version
* Requestors with m
Hello,
perhaps I've missed a discussion about it, but I can't find a reason for a
(IMHO infelicitous) specification. In S04 is said:
"If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is the same lexical"
I would argue for: If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is an
error!
# New Ticket Created by Nuno Carvalho
# Please include the string: [perl #40319]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=40319 >
Hi parrot people,
Have done some cleannig in the file t/compilers/pge/06-grammar.t, al
Hi parrot people,
I haded some more tests to file 't/compilers/json/to_parrot.t' related
to numbers (test fact, exp and minus). Also haded two tests from the
RFC examples. The second one is failing due to number precision (the
test is tagged TODO). For example, we try to match:
"Longitude":-122.
FYI: Just noticed that the increasingly-populated Perl 6 Wiki was recently
crawled by Google. ... Unfortunately the Wiki doesn't turn up anywhere near
the top of simple perl6 and Perl 6 Google searches yet. ... Someday soon,
hopefully
Below are Google results from doing local site search for "
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 08:59:51AM -0700, David Brunton wrote:
: Hi all,
:
: There is currently a mismatch between S12 and Pugs. The former specifies
$obj.META, the latter has implemented $obj.meta.
.META is more correct at the moment.
: Is there any reason I shouldn't change the tests from me
Steve Lukas skribis 2006-09-11 4:35 (-0700):
> "If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is the same lexical"
> I would argue for: If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope,
> it is an error!
I agree.
The reason that I love "my $foo" is that it always gives me a new
variable.
On 9/11/06, Larry Wall wrote:
Only that I'm thinking of renaming all the meta-ish methods to use
interrogative pronouns:
.META-> .HOW
.SKID-> .WHO
.PKG -> .WHAT
.VAR -> .WHERE
.WHO and .WHAT strike me as better being swapped. Maybe...
or some such. Not s
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 10:59:20AM -0600, David Green wrote:
: In that case, .WHO definitely makes more sense for the name.
I don't see it. Who I am is my identity. What I am is a Person or some such.
Larry
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 11:58:28AM +0800, Audrey Tang wrote:
: Consider these cases:
: [=] $x, $y, $z;
: [+=] $a, $b, $c;
:
: S03 is currently inconsistent. It first says these are not supported:
:
: The final metaoperator in Perl 6 is the reduction operator. Any
: infix operator (excep
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 09:18:19AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: .PKG -> .WHAT
I should have said
.ref-> .WHAT
there, since it was the intention to rename .ref that brought all this
on in the first place. (And what you actually get from .WHAT is the
prototype object
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 08:54:02PM +0200, TSa wrote:
: But are assignment ops allowed as initializer?
:
: my $z = $p but= { .y = 17 };
Why not? It's only the first = that's potentially special. (And it's
only for non-my, since my's = is an ordinary assignment at normal
run time.) I don't see
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 11:12:00AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 08:54:02PM +0200, TSa wrote:
: : But are assignment ops allowed as initializer?
: :
: : my $z = $p but= { .y = 17 };
:
: Why not? It's only the first = that's potentially special. (And it's
: only for non-my
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 08:32:26AM -0700, Nuno Carvalho wrote:
>
> Attached to this message you can find a patch to
> 't/compilers/pge/06-grammar.t'.
Many thanks for your excellent work on 06-grammar.t . It's
a nice addition.
After applying the patch, I get "1 subtest UNEXPECTEDLY SUCCEEDED".
I
Hi
I am trying to dig a little on compilers/imcc (the pir parser) and make
it reentrant: remove globals, and create an object with those variables
which are relevant just to the parser.
Now, I found the Interp structure. It is being passed to the parser, but
I think its main usage is not for
Trey Harris schrieb:
> I agree with the sentiment, but as a practical matter, not having HTML
> methods in CGI.pm could drastically limit Perl 6 adoption.
Oh well. I thought it was common sense that it's a bad idea to mix code
and markup. Who really wants to do itself this pain should use a
separa
If Perl6 CGI.pm is intended to be the successor of the P5 CGI.pm (the
quasi-standard for Perl web programming) is should really get a modern
design.
I agree completely. In that vein, I think that one thing a lot of web
developers would like to have available more easily would be session
man
Steve (>):
"If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is the same lexical"
I would argue for: If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is an
error!
I agree.
Enforcing one and only one declaration feels like a Good Thing, for
Juerd's reasons. With me, multiple 'my' for
Mark Stosberg wrote:
> The formal definition of "Inf" appears to be missing from the spec
> documents. Since I'm not exactly sure how Perl 6 treats "Inf", I'll
> leave submitting this patch to someone else.
>
> Once the spec is added, a smart link to it should be added from:
> t/builtins/math/infi
Mark Stosberg wrote:
> The formal definition of "Inf" appears to be missing from the spec
> documents. Since I'm not exactly sure how Perl 6 treats "Inf", I'll
> leave submitting this patch to someone else.
>
> Once the spec is added, a smart link to it should be added from:
> t/builtins/math/infi
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 04:35:08AM -0700, Steve Lukas wrote:
>
> I would argue for: If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is an
> error!
>
> Well, this error happens most likely due to my tiredness and I want the
> compiler to wake me up.
> This can be important because I would
On Mon, Sep 04, 2006 at 10:52:35PM -0700, Trey Harris wrote:
: In a message dated Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Ph. Marek writes:
: >I now had a look at http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S06.html
: >but didn't find what I meant. Sorry if I'm just dumb and don't
: >understand you (or S06); I'll try to e
Hi all,
There is currently a mismatch between S12 and Pugs. The former specifies
$obj.META, the latter has implemented $obj.meta.
Is there any reason I shouldn't change the tests from meta to META, make the
corresponding changes in Pugs.Prim, and then fix any other examples or modules
it brok
24 matches
Mail list logo
