Re: RFC 357 (v1) Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD

2000-10-03 Thread John Porter
You would just need a pod converter to process it. And you could probably whip that up yourself in no time. -- John Porter By pressing down a special key It plays a little melody

Re: RFC 357 (v1) Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD

2000-10-03 Thread John Porter
a converter to handle L, IMG, etc., could be written. > So people > stick to Plain Old POD, sans fancy =for business, 90% of the time. Yes - as it was meant to be. -- John Porter By pressing down a special key It plays a little melody

Re: RFC 357 (v1) Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD

2000-10-03 Thread John Porter
ieve it will, and it won't be difficult -- nothing that would make XML seem like an attractive alternative. -- John Porter By pressing down a special key It plays a little melody

Re: perl6storm #0050

2000-09-26 Thread John Porter
having parens. Other punctiation is available. One of the improvements ML makes over Lisp is the use of different bracketers to signify semantically different kinds of lists. -- John Porter Aus des Weltalls ferne funken Radiosterne.

Re: RFC 357 (v1) Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD

2000-10-04 Thread John Porter
a concept. Sounds to me like the real issue is that writing pod converters is harder than it ought to be (rather like the situation with XS). I think most people don't realize that they can write a converter if they want to. -- John Porter By pressing down a special key It plays a little melody

Re: perl6storm #0050

2000-09-27 Thread John Porter
n of what the language allows vs. what it requires. Perl is nice because it allows you to write in (nearly) any style you want -- lots of parens, no whitespace... Requiring the use of parens is about as un-perl-like as requiring indentation to denote blocks. -- John Porter Aus des Weltalls ferne funken Radiosterne.

Re: RFC 357 (v1) Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD

2000-10-01 Thread John Porter
e over the years; only the supporting tools have been maturing, most notably the Pod::Parser module. -- John Porter Jetzt schalten wir das Radio an. Aus dem Lautsprecher klingt es dann...

Variable attributes (was Re: RFC 355 (v1) Leave $[ alone.)

2000-10-01 Thread John Porter
rays? How do you set an attribute on a global variable? -- John Porter Jetzt schalten wir das Radio an. Aus dem Lautsprecher klingt es dann...

Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Perl Core Should Have Well-Defined APIs and Behavior

2000-10-01 Thread 'John Porter'
r the link, Peter. I have now checked out Dia, and I'm not enthusiastic about it. It seems to be a good start, but maturity is a long way off. Not only that, but it is cumbersome (imho) to set up. I still think I'd rather see a java or web-based solution. -- John Porter

Re: Variable attributes (was Re: RFC 355 (v1) Leave $[ alone.)

2000-10-01 Thread John Porter
Jeremy Howard wrote: > > I haven't got around to RFCing the more generic version (that all attributes > are inherited inside nested data types), but that would certainly be a nice > approach. Not to confuse, let's call it cascading instead of inheritance. -- John Porter

Re: Undermining the Perl Language

2000-10-01 Thread John Porter
d in support of their > arguments is not lost on other non-US members of this list. Not to mention the ironies in that the rebellion was fomented, in large part, by committees, and that our supreme ruling document was drafted and approved by committees -- NOT by an autocrat, and NOT by the at-large populace. -- John Porter

Re: RFC 357 (v1) Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD

2000-10-05 Thread John Porter
Philip Newton wrote: > If the pod (or whatever) is in a > separate file, this advantage is lost. Of course; I'd *never* say that there should be NO documentation in the perl code file. That would be absurd. -- John Porter By pressing down a special key It plays a little melody

Re: perl6storm #0050

2000-09-28 Thread John Porter
you can expect to need parens sometimes. -- John Porter Jetzt schalten wir das Radio an. Aus dem Lautsprecher klingt es dann...

Re: Murdering @ISA considered cruel and unusual

2000-09-28 Thread John Porter
Tom Christiansen wrote: > > Perl's use of @ISA is beautiful. > > use base is, or can be, pretty silly -- > think pseudohashes, just for one. I suppose you diddle @INC directly, Tom, instead of use'ing lib? -- John Porter

Re: split() ideas

2000-09-28 Thread John Porter
numbers, such that split returns a list of strings each as >long as the corresponding number. @strings = do { my $re = join '', map { "(.{$_})" } @lengths; /$re/ }; -- John Porter

Re: Update on Larry's talk

2000-10-11 Thread John Porter
Nathan Torkington wrote: > won't be able to > make many conclusive pronouncements in his talk. > > I'll make sure his talk is available for all to read once it's given. Uh, what talk is that? -- John Porter

perl should optimize for extreme cases (was Re: [FWP] Wanted - Have = Need)

2000-10-17 Thread John Porter
[Warning - mailing list violently altered!] John Carter wrote: > On Fri, 13 Oct 2000, John Porter wrote: > > > As a concrete example, perl's data structures are always > > managed in memory; while things like sort and merge have > > been written to utilize o

Re: Perl's parser and lexer will likely be in Perl (was Re: RFC 334 (v1) I'm {STILL} trying to understand this...)

2000-10-17 Thread John Porter
crafted LR(k) monstrosity. This is a case of me agreeing with Simon 1000%. I was going to just let it go by, but I thought it might be nice to add my for a change. -- John Porter

Re: What will the Perl6 code name be?

2000-10-20 Thread John Porter
Jerrad Pierce wrote: > > What about Hexane? Arthropod (or some insect)? Hmmm "anthracite" ? -- John Porter

Re: What will the Perl6 code name be?

2000-10-23 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > > We believe that > the world-turning program was rewritten in Perl in 1997. We do? Huh. What else do we believe? -- John Porter

Re: What will the Perl6 code name be?

2000-10-23 Thread John Porter
bly *implement* perl in Ada, of course. -- John Porter Standard emoticons apply.

Re: TIL redux (was Re: What will the Perl6 code name be?)

2000-10-24 Thread John Porter
Uri Guttman wrote: > if i want TIL and lose builtin overloading, that is > a fine tradeoff to me. No, no, no! That is one of the things that absolutely must be fixed in the next major version of Perl! -- John Porter

Re: Perl6 the platform-dependent bits...

2000-10-24 Thread John Porter
Garrett Goebel wrote: > > I'm sure you won't be surprised by this, but I recall John > Porter as being a C-- fan. Now why is he being mysteriously silent? Nope, wasn't me. Never heard of it until someone brought it up earlier. I do admit, it sounds intriguing. >

Re: How to tell (in perl5) if friz is a core command or not?

2000-10-30 Thread John Porter
Garrett Goebel wrote: > eval { prototype "CORE::$func" }; Strangely, prototype() "works" in 5.004_04, but does not throw the exception for non-existent functions. -- John Porter

Re: Critique available

2000-11-02 Thread John Porter
t > the truest OOP language in existence, but it has a tiny user base. But it's NOT because people wouldn't like to program in Eiffel, and it's not because Eiffel isn't an excellent solution language. It's because Eiffel is an expensive proprietary product. -- John Porter

Re: Critique available

2000-11-02 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > > On the whole, driving a spike between language and internals by giving them > separate lists was not a good idea. Nominally. But how many internals experts actually subscribed to the one and not the other? -- John Porter

Re: Critique available

2000-11-02 Thread John Porter
mming languages. And IIRC, Java was invoked several times. :-) -- John Porter

Re: Critique available

2000-11-02 Thread John Porter
to blame for > it. Perl is _lousy_ for those tasks. I disagree. The vendor can *always* be blamed. :-) -- John Porter

Re: Critique available

2000-11-02 Thread John Porter
would > certainly be seriously dissatisfied with perl, they're as close to > opposite languages as I can think of, in many ways. Nope, not quite the same. -- John Porter

Re: virtual machine implementation options

2000-11-02 Thread John Porter
Fwiw: BSDI BSD/OS 4.0.1 .../GENERIC i386 gcc version 2.7.2.1 -O3 none GOTO1.739.31 SWITCH 7.4019.81 Everything else 12.62 15.24 -- John Porter

Re: Critique available

2000-11-03 Thread John Porter
David Grove wrote: > > "Issues should be faced rather than avoided by > attacking the person who points them out." Maybe; but that doesn't apply to non-issues being paraded as issues. -- John Porter

Elk - another paragon for us

2000-11-10 Thread John Porter
remen.de/software/elk/ -- John Porter

Re: Guidelines for internals proposals and documentation

2000-11-15 Thread John Porter
oups > as a collective, general election of a core team was shot down We take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week... Hope you get my point. -- John Porter

Re: Guidelines for internals proposals and documentation

2000-11-19 Thread John Porter
John van V wrote: > > My second desire is to build perl6 purely w/ perl tools/servers, > and then wholly with perl6 as soon as it can stand on its own. > That way if there are any problems the core team would be the > first to know about it ;) -- John Porter "Perl is my dogfood."

Re: Proposal for groups

2000-12-03 Thread John Porter
Dan Sugalski wrote: > You forgot: > * Secret vote of the Perl Cabal... > ;-) And also: * Behind-the-scenes string-pulling by corporate interests. -- John Porter

Re: Proposal for groups

2000-12-03 Thread John Porter
* the Triads Do you mean: * The Trilateral Commission > * the Freemasons And/Or: * The OTO > * the Illuminati Sure. And what about: * The Drug Cartels * The Media * Joggers :-) -- John Porter A cop knelt and kissed the feet of a priest, and a

Re: Perl6 in Java? (was Re: Meta-design)

2000-12-07 Thread John Porter
f that, a logical re-write (or a re-design/re-write, of the sort we're undertaking) could. -- John Porter I saw the final vicar make confession to a dancer We stood upon the bridge at dawn and the dancer kissed my cancer

Re: Meta-design

2000-12-07 Thread John Porter
t a crash. You would think, in this day and age... Btw, fwiw, I think that if C is really considered a front runner, I would throw in my lot with C++ instead. It's nearly as portable, nearly as fast, and WAY WAY BETTER to code in. -- John Porter I saw the final vicar make

Re: Meta-design

2000-12-07 Thread John Porter
s that. Almost. You're potentially taking away Perl6, which is vaporware. I wonder: In what order will the following exist on Handheld Device Foo: - C - C++ - Java - Perl6 -- John Porter

Re: Meta-design

2000-12-07 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > > Great. When it comes down to it, what are you doing here? Excellent question. -- John Porter

Re: Meta-design

2000-12-07 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 11:22:35AM -0500, John Porter wrote: > > [C++] > > > It's nearly as portable, > > Uhm. Is this actually true? I don't know. Sounds reasonable! :-) Aside from lame-o solutions like C-front and cross-compiling

Re: Meta-design

2000-12-07 Thread John Porter
The Backwards Compatibility Beast rears its slathering, kerotic heads... -- John Porter I saw the final vicar make confession to a dancer We stood upon the bridge at dawn and the dancer kissed my cancer

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-27 Thread John Porter
David L. Nicol wrote: > > Is there a perl6 sort committee yet? AFter reading Cawley's > method here, I wonder if using it we could make radix-sorts the > default sort method. Perl6 ought to support pluggable sort algorithms, just as Perl now supports pluggable comparison fun

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-28 Thread John Porter
Nathan Torkington wrote: > > By "pluggable" you mean that sort() should be overridable? use D::Oh s s\?s.s; -- John Porter What would Gabrielle do?

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-28 Thread John Porter
sible for perl intrinsics to use disk buffers whenever necessary, globally. (*If the mail archives were searchable, I'd give an actual reference.) -- John Porter What would Gabrielle do?

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-28 Thread John Porter
Dan Sugalski wrote: > >use sort qw(radix_sort); >sort \&radix_sort @data; Isn't that the slot where the comparison function goes? Maybe something more like this: use sort::radix_sort; sort @data; # magically uses radix_sort instead of default. -- John Porter What would Gabrielle do?

Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order

2001-01-05 Thread John Porter
hms. > (I pronounced 5.005_03 as "five double-aught five oh three".) That's not pedantic, that's anal. I say "five five three". ObPerl: use Lingua::EN::Numbers; sub infix_units { my( $n, $u ) = $_[0] =~ /([.\d]+)\s*(\w+)/; my $s = Lingua::EN::Numbers->new($n)->get_string; $s =~ s/point/$u/g; $s } print infix_units( "45.60 Pounds" ); -- John Porter What would Gabrielle do?

Re: About RFC 271: pre/post handlers

2001-01-24 Thread John Porter
t's what the RFC proposes, at the language level. I don't see where you've offered an alternative to defining the two separately. -- John Porter Took away his vocal, put him in a blackhole, blocking up the entrance with tar and muck

Re: JWZ on s/Java/Perl/

2001-01-27 Thread John Porter
is like an array of Object in Java, or an array of void* in C. Like jwz said, if only they had done TRT and made intrinsics inherit (or appear to) from Object, it wouldn't be an issue in Java either. -- John Porter So take a pointed stick and touch Piggy's eyes He's gonna turn and leave you a big surprise

Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE!

2001-01-29 Thread John Porter
's "how". Apparently chop() is specialized internally to detect the hashness of its argument, in a way that can't be expressed by a prototype. -- John Porter So take a pointed stick and touch Piggy's eyes He's gonna turn and leave you a big surprise

Re: Why shouldn't sleep(0.5) DWIM?

2001-01-31 Thread John Porter
y best-reasonably-available.) The issue of B is I outside perl's bailiwick. -- John Porter

Re: Why shouldn't sleep(0.5) DWIM?

2001-01-31 Thread John Porter
compatible with perl5, > but that's not an invitation to break everything that can be broken. Not changing things (for the better) in the name of not "breaking" things is a non-starting argument. "Perl should remain Perl" (once known as RFC 0) is bogus, because it'

Re: Why shouldn't sleep(0.5) DWIM?

2001-02-01 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > But you need to remember it anyway, so remembering it for time() is > > no added burden. > > Uhm. NO! Remembering that $x+1 things have changed is an "added burden" > over remembering that $x things have changed.

Re: Why shouldn't sleep(0.5) DWIM?

2001-02-01 Thread John Porter
t perpetuated; preserving compatibility where possible is an adjunct benefit. Of course, we've been around this before; too bad we have to revisit it from time to time. -- John Porter A pessimist says the CPU is 50% utilized. An optimist says the CPU is 50% unutilized. A realist says the network is the bottleneck.

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
;s only a few places it can reasonably be expected to come from. Vs. calling something like time(), which can only come from someplace that defines it I (or whatever is the current default namespace) , including by export from some other namespace. -- John Porter A pessimist says the CPU is 50% uti

Re: Why shouldn't sleep(0.5) DWIM?

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > > > we would only implement changes that add something desirable. > > How does removing time() add something desirable? I'm not motivated to give an answer to that, because I'm not arguing in favor of removing time(). -- John Porter

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
And, btw, perhaps we need to provide a way to un-load a loaded definition. This would be needed for, eg., migratory code. Or even just long-lived perl processes like mod_perl. -- John Porter A pessimist says the CPU is 50% utilized. An optimist says the CPU is 50% unutilized. A realist says the network is the bottleneck.

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
And isn't this rather off-topic for this list? Sounds more like an internals thing... -- John Porter

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
redo; # which is shorthand for: redo foo; # like goto &foo; } Proposals along these lines came up in the thread "$a in @b", in the subsequent discussion of RFC 199, and probably in other threads. -- John Porter A pessimist says the CPU i

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
ere return() puts its args anyway. In fact, shouldn't it be @__ ? Too bad it's too late to write an RFC... -- John Porter A pessimist says the CPU is 50% utilized. An optimist says the CPU is 50% unutilized. A realist says the network is the bottleneck.

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
, probably Modula (/Modula3/Oberon) provide a better pattern to follow. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
John Porter wrote: > Well, Java has interfaces, but I'm pretty sure that's not > where we want to go; they're very OO-specific. And Corba likewise. -- John Porter

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
p with a solution to this problem, please send an email to ICANN. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-02 Thread John Porter
y be numbers, since they are not inherently ordered. I could number *mine* jdp1, jdp1_1, etc., if I want... -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
lly give us all those array operations for the list. In order to C< push @^R >, there has to be a data structure there that supports the push operator. And if that is going to be the case, then I don't see the point in all this over having your own array variable and returning that when yo

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
apability can be seen in languages like Modula. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > Assigning to barewords? Blurgh. At the > very least, make @subname and $subname special lexicals. Or eliminate $ and @ from the language. :-) or rather :-/. -- John Porter Ann wenno haddum billizac...

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
rl -we 'push @^R, 42' Type of arg 1 to push must be array (not list alias) at -e line 1, at EOF Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors. -- John Porter Ann wenno haddum billizac...

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
n the sub visible in the post handler? (Of course I realize *F does not illustrate this...) -- John Porter Ann wenno haddum billizac...

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
it pertains, in much the same way that BEGIN and END blocks reside inside the file to which they pertain. So: sub readit { open F, "< $f" or die "$f: $!"; ; catch { ... } end { close F } } -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > use End; > > { my $foo = end {print "Leaving the block\n"}; > ... > last; # Prints "Leaving the block\n". > ... > } Yep, that's *perfect*, for a proof of concept. -- John Porter

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-05 Thread John Porter
n at sub exit, even when appended to return(): return always close F; # statement modifier? would do the wrong thing. I wonder if it shouldn't rather be return ; always { close F } # a catchy block. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Really auto autoloaded modules

2001-02-06 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > > Whether it's a good idea or a bad idea is largely irrelevant; the > purpose of -language is to decide whether or not it should be possible. I think historically this has not been the case. But I suppose we could change the purpose of -language mid-strea

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-06 Thread John Porter
be shoved inside rather than dangling off the end. JMHO. -- John Porter

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-07 Thread John Porter
Johan Vromans wrote: > > Would the POST be executed if the open fails? Why? Why not? Of course. It's a post-handler on the sub. > All that POST and such do, is obfuscate the flow of control. No more so than contine{} on a loop, or END{} in a file, or DESTROY{} in a class. -

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-07 Thread John Porter
ays { ... } } > What about the try/finally cases? It's pretty clear, IMHO, > that the catch and finally clauses apply to the try statement, There is no try, there is only do. :-) > previous blocks are critical, because under various circumstances > blocks need to be triggered by exc

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-07 Thread John Porter
}; sub foo { bar(); } sub bar { die $barney; } All three of these blocks are "subject to non-local control flow rules", including the body of foo. -- John Porter

Re: assign to magic name-of-function variable instead of "return"

2001-02-07 Thread John Porter
ry blocks (by adding the approprate decoration) and some aren't. But I don't see the advantage of it if any and every block is implicitly a try block. -- John Porter

Re: POST blocks (like END, but in a sub or sub-like scope)

2001-02-08 Thread John Porter
seems rather appropriate > here. Right. I'm particularly concerned about lexical variables; a post block ought to have scope to the my vars in the block to which it pertains. Sticking it inside lexically makes this clear. -- John Porter

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-08 Thread John Porter
ntage in having a keyword to indicate the > closure, because the variable is actually stored together with the sub > reference somehow, and having a keyword to indicate that would make it > explicit. Why should it be explicit? What ambiguity needs to be cleared up? I like the fact that perl handles the grotty details for me. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: POST blocks (like END, but in a sub or sub-like scope)

2001-02-08 Thread John Porter
ivation record for the file (ignoring threads); lexicals in the file are known at compile time, and so are visible to the END block. Lambdas deserve post blocks too. :-) -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Auto-install (was autoloaded...)

2001-02-09 Thread John Porter
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > > > (for those of you who didn't get the reference) > > Well, I certainly heard the reference before even hearing of Perl or Tom... I only ever saw it with his name on it. So if he didn't coin it, then I think he "appropriated" it... -- John Porter

Re: Auto-install (was autoloaded...)

2001-02-09 Thread John Porter
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote: > > There isn't a software problem another abstraction layer can't fix... "...except the problem of too many layers of abstraction". tchrist (for those of you who didn't get the reference) -- John Porter

Re: Auto-install (was autoloaded...)

2001-02-09 Thread John Porter
leged downside of having a flexible solution. -- John Porter

Re: "Art Of Unix Programming" on Perl

2001-02-12 Thread John Porter
r him. We do a lot of talk, but his words are the only ones that matter in the end." Somehow I don't think this is how it was meant to be. -- John Porter

Re: Garbage collection (was Re: JWZ on s/Java/Perl/)

2001-02-13 Thread John Porter
> James Mastros wrote: > > >"It isn't possible to AUTOLOAD DESTROY." --perlmem(6) I'm not sure what that means. Certainly AUTOLOAD gets called if DESTROY is called but not defined ... just like any other method. -- John Porter

Re: Garbage collection (was Re: JWZ on s/Java/Perl/)

2001-02-14 Thread John Porter
. Perl decides for itself when to do GC. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Garbage collection (was Re: JWZ on s/Java/Perl/)

2001-02-14 Thread John Porter
Branden wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > > ...and trigger a GC that will get rid of the arg. > > > > No. Perl decides for itself when to do GC. > > The idea is to *allow* a programmer to explicitly destroy an object, for > better (and sooner) resource disposal. T

Re: defined: Short-cutting on || with undef only.

2001-02-15 Thread John Porter
Branden wrote: > > I think this should be applied to the `defined' function, Oh, no, here we go again. Branden, why do you insist on dredging up every contentious issue which has already been beaten to death? Maybe you need to read the archives first. -- John Porter You can&#

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-15 Thread John Porter
inside the > : block. > : And that's AAAD for sure! > > I never said `our' should affect the variables inside the block! Well, I don't know what happened here. All I did was cut out some lines. I did not (at least not intentionally) twiddle the meaning of your (or anyone else's) words. > I'm only asking if it has the ``far more > serious problems than it purports to solve'' you said it has. Please go back and read all the threads I referred to in my previous post. In a nutshell, I agree with the naysayers. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-15 Thread John Porter
xically scoped variables to > guarantee they won't harm scripts that use those modules, I think it's a > win. use strict 'vars' + my is already more than sufficient to this need. > I also see no action at a distance here, since the only way to change the > ... > assuming `our' *outside* the block would affect variables inside the block. I have to disagree with you. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-15 Thread John Porter
only applies to un-declared variables, which currently (and hopefully forever) can only be global variables. -- John Porter

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-15 Thread John Porter
ng against your proposal because I think it's a bad idea and is bad for perl. I assure you if it goes in, I will not use it. You don't need to worry about that. -- John Porter Ann wenno haddum billizac...

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
d your breath. (All this to save two keystrokes. Sheesh.) > In Perl 6, where the compiler will be written in Perl, What have you been smoking? -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
er that lots of CPAN will be irreparably broken by the change to perl6. So in some sense we're starting with a much cleaner slate than is supposed. -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Warnings, strict, and CPAN

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
es, this argument may turn out to be moot. (Sorry, Schwern... Couldn't let you have the last word ;-) -- John Porter You can't keep Perl6 Perl5.

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
; The point is that consistency is NOT the overarching goal of perl's design; being useful to the programmer is. It turns out that 'my' having higher precedence than comma is signficantly more useful than if it had a lower precedence. Let's all just acknowledge that fact, and move on. -- John Porter Ann wenno haddum billizac...

Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
fic improvement. Basically you want to change (= break) the current precedence of the comma operator. Thank you, Mr. Language Designer. -- John Porter Ann wenno haddum billizac...

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
; around `my's variables, what also increases readability. If you're willing to require additional parens from other programmers, you should be wiling to bear the burden of putting them in, yourself. -- John Porter

Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs)

2001-02-16 Thread John Porter
Simon Cozens wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > But they are inextricably bound by perl's parsing rules. > > Perl 5's parsing rules. I don't think Perl 6 *has* a parser just yet. As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed Just Because We Can. Aspect

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >