Larry Wall skribis 2006-09-20 16:34 (-0700):
> That should work but my preference is just
> my @bar = $q.param[];
> That is, empty .[] has the same arrayifying semantics as @. (This is
> currently b0rken in pugs though.) Likewise .{} is equivalen to %.
Nice, but what's the syntax for an empt
Mark Stosberg skribis 2006-09-16 21:32 (-0500):
> In theory, "use perl5:CGI" could be a fine solution. In practice, it
> hasn't worked out well for me.Even something that seems simple like
> passing a hashref to Perl 5 is not documented now.
I base my thoughts on Perl 6, not Pugs specifically. It'
Aankhen skribis 2006-09-20 18:32 (-0700):
> If those are modules to generate markup, I don't see why they should
> under the Web namespace. There needs to be a Web.pm toolkit (or
> something similar), but that's mostly an amalgamation of other
> modules.
Because they speak the same language. That
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
"Fagyal" == Fagyal Csongor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Fagyal> As a side note I also have to add that I really dislike the
Fagyal> "html-functions" CGI.pm currently has. Creating the representation is
Fagyal> the task of the designer, not the programmer.
Some pseudo-code for illustration. Maybe we should put this on version
control or wiki, and collectively hack on it. If we can agree on any
certain route.
If anyone wants to go ahead and implement things, don't wait for me
please. I unfortunately do not have the tuits to do this in full. I
don't e
On Tue, Sep 19, 2006 at 08:16:26AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > "David" == David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> But don't throw out the simplicity of CGI.pm's basic task handling: parsing
> >> the incoming parameters (including file upload), and generating sticky
> >> forms
Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Some pseudo-code for illustration. Maybe we should put this on
> version control or wiki
Just to state this somewhere: if anyone needs a subversion repository
for such Perl6 related stuff, I'm willing to setup svn repositories
and users on our Dresden Perl Monge
On 9/20/06, Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Larry Wall wrote:
> What we really need is a unary operator that is sugar for [,](=(...)). Just
> don't anyone suggest *. :-)
I was thinking about that. I wonder if [\] would make sense, or is that
just begging to have in-editor parsers fall
Ok, I dkimmed through the synopses again and didn't see this offhand.
If I have two arrays @a and @b and I wish to create a two-element list
out of them - a la Perl5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - what's the
correct way to do
that in Perl6? If it's still ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PR
Mark J. Reed skribis 2006-09-21 9:53 (-0400):
> If I have two arrays @a and @b and I wish to create a two-element list
> out of them - a la Perl5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - what's the
> correct way to do
> that in Perl6? If it's still ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]), then
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maintainer: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Aug 2004
- Last Modified: 18 Sept 2006
+ Last Modified: 20 Sept 2006
Number: 2
- Version: 69
+ Version: 70
+| capture/arguments/match
+|$args; # all of the above
I'll read that as
Mark J. Reed wrote:
Ok, I dkimmed through the synopses again and didn't see this offhand.
If I have two arrays @a and @b and I wish to create a two-element list
out of them - a la Perl5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - what's the
correct way to do
that in Perl6? If it's still ([EMAIL
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Ok, I dkimmed through the synopses again and didn't see this offhand.
That's what I get for dkimming instead of reading. Or even skimming.
OK, so "Capture objects fill the ecological niche of references in
Perl 6." Got it. Perhaps we should also mention the use of Captu
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:29:57AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: I'll read that as "conversation terminated".
The conversation is never terminated. However, every now and then I
make feeble attempts to be decisive. :)
: Can you please update S03's "Junctive operators" section to note how the
:
On 9/21/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: note how the ambiguity of the following are resolved:
:
: a|$b
: a | $b
: a |$b
:
Don't think so. The situation is exactly analogous to:
a%$b
a % $b
a %$b
The cultural ambiguity is also being reduced insofar as we're trying
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 12:16:26PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote:
: Which means that argumentless subroutine calls will presumably be rare
: in P6 code, but what about methods? Methods with no arguments (apart
: from the invocant) will always be commonplace, and it seems to me that
: you have exactly
On 9/21/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A method never takes arguments unless you use : or (), so those are
all infix.
Well, all righty then. Yay for unambiguity! Or disambiguation. Or
nonambiguosity. Or whatever...
The design team worked Really Hard to get rid of that particula
All sounds good up to:
Larry Wall wrote:
The cultural ambiguity is also being reduced insofar as we're trying
to discourage use of bare constants in favor of sigilled constants.
If you see a bare function name you should generally assume it
has arguments in Perl 6.
Well, in that case, should
# New Ticket Created by Jerry Gay
# Please include the string: [perl #40392]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=40392 >
parrot's source is littered with internal_exception() calls, the bulk
(all?) of which shoul
On 9/20/06, Jerry Gay via RT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
thanks, applied as r14673, with a minor fix:
-$print_coda();
+&print_coda();
Doh! Should have got that one right... Thanks for spotting it. :-)
Paul
On 9/21/06, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Because they speak the same language. That is: they know about arguments
passed via forms, and the preferred output language (xhtml? html?).
Ah, I didn't think of that. My bad. Roles for all these things sound
great to me. :-)
Aankhen
Larry Wall skribis 2006-09-21 15:24 (-0700):
> : > That is, empty .[] has the same arrayifying semantics as @. (This is
> : > currently b0rken in pugs though.) Likewise .{} is equivalen to %.
> : Nice, but what's the syntax for an empty slice then?
> Oh, I expect .[()] would work for that. Why y
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:10:04AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2006-09-20 16:34 (-0700):
: > That should work but my preference is just
: > my @bar = $q.param[];
: > That is, empty .[] has the same arrayifying semantics as @. (This is
: > currently b0rken in pugs though.) Likewis
On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 12:34:47AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2006-09-21 15:24 (-0700):
: > : > That is, empty .[] has the same arrayifying semantics as @. (This is
: > : > currently b0rken in pugs though.) Likewise .{} is equivalen to %.
: > : Nice, but what's the syntax for an emp
> ""A" == "A Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
"A> * Randal L. Schwartz [2006-09-20 19:30]:
>> "Fagyal" == Fagyal Csongor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> yet I never needed those HTML generating methods.
>>
>> You've never made a sticky form then.
"A> False dilemma. You can create stic
Randal L. Schwartz skribis 2006-09-21 9:15 (-0700):
> We need the same thing for Perl6: "If you're going to do simple web stuff,
> please use MUMBLE module". And MUMBLE better have tight integration of param
> processing and sticky form generation, as well as good header generation for
> cookies
Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
And MUMBLE better be included *with* Perl6.
I disagree. Anything that can be left out of the base Perl6 distro
should be.
* It's too inflexible, so it doesn't allow for a new improved module to
come along to replace it.
* It requires more from the Perl6 maintaine
* Randal L. Schwartz [2006-09-22 01:25]:
> HTML::FillInForm, HTML::Widget, CGI::FormBuilder were *not* in
> core. CGI.pm was. One stop shopping. Easy to describe to
> people.
That still doesn’t prove that tight coupling is necessary between
parameter parsing and HTML generation.
The concept of c
Agent Zhang wrote:
> On 9/19/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Have there been any significant changes since the 2nd. edition of "Perl 6
>> and Parrot Essentials"?
>>
>> If so, where should I look for a summary?
>>
>>
>
> Yes, there have. That book is completely out of d
Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Ok, I dkimmed through the synopses again and didn't see this offhand.
>
> If I have two arrays @a and @b and I wish to create a two-element list
> out of them - a la Perl5 ([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) - what's the
> correct way to do
> that in Perl6? If it's stil
Larry Wall wrote:
> Okay, I think this is worth bringing up to the top level.
>
> Fact: Captures seem to be turning into a first-class data structure
> that can represent:
>
> argument lists
> match results
> XML nodes
> anything that requires all of $, @, and % bits.
>
Also;
How would I construct a capture literal that has both an invocant and
at least one positional argument? How do I distinguish this from a
capture literal that has no invocant and at least two positional
arguments?
Gut instinct: if the first parameter in a list is delimited from the
rest using a c
Two questions:
1. How would the capture sigil affect the use of capture objects as
replacements for perl5's references?
2. With the introduction of the capture sigil, would it be worthwhile
to allow someone to specify a signature as a capture object's 'type'?
That is:
my :(Dog: Str $name, Nu
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:03:45PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: How would I construct a capture literal that has both an invocant and
: at least one positional argument? How do I distinguish this from a
: capture literal that has no invocant and at least two positional
: arguments?
:
: Gut insti
On Thu, Sep 21, 2006 at 10:20:20PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Two questions:
:
: 1. How would the capture sigil affect the use of capture objects as
: replacements for perl5's references?
I don't see how it would have any effect at all, unless the P5 ref happened
to be to a typeglob, or had bo
35 matches
Mail list logo
