On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 08:50:24AM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Bradley M. Kuhn writes:
> > It seems to me that the perl6-internals, perl6-qa, and perl6-licenses groups
> > should be able to produce additional RFCs after this. Of course, the
> > Language will be frozen, but these three group
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 03:48:33AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "PRL" == Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> PRL> -r freadable()
> PRL> -w fwriteable()
> PRL> -x fexecable()
> PRL> -o fowned()
>
> PRL> -R Freadable()
> PRL> -W Fwrite
On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 08:50:28AM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On 27 Sep 2000 09:16:10 +0300, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
>
> >Another option is to stuff the long names into some namespace, and
> >export them upon request (or maybe not export them, upon request).
>
> Can you say "method"?
Doesn't wo
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:14:49PM -0500, David Grove wrote:
> [...] I've no idea why Sarathy was deposed,
He wasn't.
> but I have a
> pretty big suspicion.
And a pretty big, well known problem with ActiveState.
> The problem is, I love Sarathy too. He's a hero,
Yes, he's pretty heroic.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2000 at 08:06:42AM +0200, H . Merijn Brand wrote:
> On 27 Sep 2000 07:36:42 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> > http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
> >
> > =head1 TITLE
> >
> > First-Class CGI Support
>
> Freezing
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 12:05:14AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2000 at 04:59:50PM -0400, Jorg Ziefle wrote:
> > Detailed information should follow soon. Should I write an RFC to
> > discuss about, though I would come a bit late? :(
>
> RFC 313 not good enough for you? :)
I think
On Mon, Oct 16, 2000 at 10:37:27PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> - The core team appeared to be doing too much, meddling in affairs
> which didn't concern them.
http://www.freebsd.org/FAQ/misc.html#AEN4823
Q: Why should I care what color the bikeshed is?
A: The really, really short answer
On Tue, Oct 17, 2000 at 06:53:47PM +1100, Jeremy Howard wrote:
> Leon Brocard wrote:
> > Hmmm, I wonder what kind of subset would be necessary - surely the
> > most useful constructs are also the most complicated...
>
> We could learn quite a bit by looking through the code from
> Parse::RecDescen
On Sat, Oct 21, 2000 at 08:59:21AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> Joshua N Pritikin writes:
> : http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/python/2000/10/04/stackless-intro.html
>
> Perl 5 is already stackless in that sense, though we never implemented
> continuations. The main impetus for going stackless was
you've lost the indirection.
There's a discussion that Larry started this weekend on -internals.
Specifically:
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:45:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Adam Turoff)
Cc: Larry W
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 08:33:23PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> as for ziggy's comments on the overload of builtins issue there could be
> a simple dispatch table used instead of direct calls.
I don't think you understand the issue. That's taking great pains
to unthread threaded bytecode once yo
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 12:54:51AM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> another TIL win is no compile phase and not even a bytecode intepreter
> startup phase. TIL code is executed directly and the script is now a
> true binary. reverse compilation is still easy due to the template
> nature of the generate
On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 11:03:12AM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >>>>> "AT" == Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> AT> It would also mean that if anything was overriden anywhere, no
> AT> module code could be read in as bytecode, since it m
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 10:55:29AM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> I don't see it.
>
> I would find it extremely akward to allow
>
> thread 1: *foo = \&one_foo;
> thread 2: *foo = \&other_foo;
> [...]
>
> copy the &foo body to a new location.
> replace the old
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 04:42:58PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 11:35:56AM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > All PDDs (like RFCs) need to start with 'Status: Developing' by default.
> > Since statuses like 'Standard', 'Rejected',
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 12:58:25PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> (Though I don't think we really need more than a few weeks to get a good
> set of working RFCs for this, though of course they'll get amended and
> expanded as work proceeds)
I'd like to see a revised set of RFC guidelines specific
On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 04:20:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> I want perl 6's internal API to have the same sort of artistic integrity
> that the language has. That's not, unfortunately, possible with everyone
> having equal say. I'd like it to be otherwise, but that's just not possible
> wit
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 05:59:40PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> 6) Only a WG chair, pumpking, or one of the principals (i.e. Me, Nat, or
> Larry, or our replacements) can mark a PDD as developing, standard, or
> superceded.
This doesn't sound right.
All PDDs (like RFCs) need to start with 'Sta
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 07:56:21AM +, Alan Burlison wrote:
> How are you going to publish the design? Asking people to follow email
> discussions and try to piece together what is proposed from that doesn't
> seem a very optimal way to go about it. How about a design document
> (format to be
On Tue, Dec 05, 2000 at 08:21:23AM +, Alan Burlison wrote:
> How about writing the documents in XML and having a 'perl specification'
> DTD? With a bit of careful thought we will be able to do all sorts of
> interesting stuff - for example if we tag function definitions we can
> start cross-c
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:23:55PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> However, the JVM is a powerful environment for generalized bytecode and for
> allowing bytecode of different languages to communicate.
So's Microsoft vaporware ".NET platform". And the second version
of that bytecoded runtime wi
On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 10:42:31PM -0500, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
> What I seek is perl design documentation that allows someone to take the set
> of PDD's and reimplement perl in another language.
What will aid Perl reimplementations are the PDDs. C-Centrism in the
PDDs is a moot point.
> The
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 05:03:12PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> There's obvious FUD out there and we don't seem to be giving the impression of
> getting much done, or doing anything to counter it.
Let's be fair. We're not getting much done, and that's a *GOOD* thing.
Language design is a very
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 04:58:11PM -0800, Matthew Cline wrote:
> What's the URL for the RFC archive?
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
Z.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 05:42:01PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 02:38 PM 2/20/2001 -0800, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> >How should the submission process work? As for the RFC's?
>
> Sounds good to me.
Any additional constraints on acceptance criteria? PDD 0 describes
an acceptable baseline on
On Tue, Feb 20, 2001 at 08:58:03PM -0500, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 February 2001 20:32, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > For example, I doubt that we want or need three competing PDDs on
> > Async I/O developing in the Standard track, but multiple PDDs on
> > the same t
On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 07:44:51PM +, David Mitchell wrote:
>
> Also, if we go down the 'have a competition to see who can write the best
> PDD on subject X' path, can we replace the 'TBD' in unnumbered PDDs
> with a short string chosen by the author? This allows us to (hopefully)
> unqiuely
On Mon, Feb 19, 2001 at 07:20:33PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
>
> As much as I'd like to respond to some of these points, I'll refrain from it
> now, I'll let my RFCs speak for themselves.
Ed,
The RFC process that we started this summer is formally and
intentionally closed. Your post, regard
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 01:41:22PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 04:04:31PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > 1) The RFC was a free-for-all brainstorming process. Intentionally.
>
> right, and your point is that brainstorming should cease(?)
Yes. Everyo
On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 12:00:45PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> As I stated in the original post, there is no reason *not* to keep the
> process open.
In an attempt to keep my previous message concise, I seem to have
neglected a few key points:
1) The RFC was a free-for-all brainstorming
A very good non-programmer friend of mine just read yet another
discussion on the Schwartzian Transform, and had this to say:
> So, having just plowed through more than I ever wanted to about
> the Schwartzian Transform:
>
> Is there some way to hard-code this into Perl6? Seems like it
> would
On Tue, Mar 20, 2001 at 11:15:51PM -0500, John Porter wrote:
> Adam Turoff wrote:
> > This message is not an RFC, nor is it an intent to add a feature
> > to Perl or specify a syntax for that feature[*].
>
> Yay.
>
[...]
> So you think
>
> @s =
>
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 08:25:17AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> I'm kinda puzzled by the focus on Schwartzian when I thought the GRT was
> demonstrated to be better.
Because the transform is a specialized case
of the schwartzian transform where the default sort is sufficient.
Address the issu
On Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 10:50:09AM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "SC" == Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> SC> Why can't Perl automagically do a Schwartzian when it sees a
> SC> comparison with complicated operators or functions on each side of
> SC> it? That is, @s = sort { f(
On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 03:31:56PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > So URLs are not
> > literals, they have structure, and only thinking of them as filenames
> > may be too simplistic.
>
> Yeah. But Rebol manages to deal with them.
I doubt it. telephone:? fax:? lpp:?
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 05:23:01PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 09:20:13AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> > So, I wonder aloud, do we want to signify that degree of change with a more
> > dramatic change in the name? Still Perl, but maybe Perl 7, Perl 10, Perl
> > 2001, Per
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 02:58:50PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> * Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/10/2001 14:18]:
> > >
> > >Perl 6 *will* provide a backwards compatible Perl 5 parser. The
> > >details are not nailed down, but this definately will happen.
> >
> > Damn straight. One way or a
On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:13:13PM -0700, David Goehrig wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:55:36AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> > If you talk that way, people are going to start believing it.
> [snip]
>
> Some of us are are talking that way because we already
> beleive it. You can't
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:41:15PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Stephen P. Potter writes:
> > It seems to me that recently (the last two years or so) and
> > especially with 6, perl is no longer the SAs friend. It is no
> > longer a fun litle language that can be easily used to hack out
> >
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:57:42AM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> It doesn't look to me like the amount of Perl one needs to know to achieve
> a given level of productivity is increasing in volume or complexity at
> all. What it looks like to me is that there are additional features being
> added
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 01:32:26PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> In that case, how exactly has it forgotten its roots? I mean, in what
> way is it not as useful as it was before?
[Please forgive the following marketspeak]
The issue isn't that Perl is less useful now. It's that it's shifted
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 12:49:00PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> If you work in a team, then the bar is raised to the union (not the
> intersection) of everyone's knowledge. But team programming is not
> for small trivial tasks, and if you're solving large complex tasks
> then it's unsurprisi
On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 08:08:40PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 12:55:55PM -0400, Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> > Atoms- Unicode. If everything is Unicode, you're going to have to grok
> > Unicode (at least tangentally) to be able to use perl.
>
> Bah. Rubbish, no more than
As some of you may have noticed from the YAPC schedule[1], I'll be hosting
the "Perl Apprenticeship Hour" next week.
I'm STILL looking for brief descriptions of projects that are
looking for some help, including:
* documentation* tools
* tutorials* bugfixes
* modules *
What follows is a long, detailed summary of an attempt to install JDK 1.2.2
on FreeBSD today. FreeBSD/JDK 1.2.2 is an unsupported configuration for Sun,
although patches exist to get the JDK to work under FreeBSD.
Skip to the last two paragraphs if you want to see how this installation
compares
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 12:02:28PM -0400, Christopher Masto wrote:
> Having gone through much the same pain a couple of weeks ago (although
> I just broke down and installed the linux-jdk-1.3.1 port after Sun's
> web site told me to come back later), I eagerly await a pure-Perl
> replacement for F
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 01:18:07PM -0500, Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
> Adam Turoff [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] quoth:
> *>
> *>Nevertheless, a degenerate case for installing Perl never requires
> *>transfers or temporary disk space measured in quarter gigabytes.
>
> Sure it ca
On Fri, Jun 29, 2001 at 05:20:40PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There's the trick, Solaris is Sun's Blessed Platform. As a
> Linux/PowerPC user, I know how Ziggy feels. I'm almost totally
> ignored by Sun and I'd imagine I'd have just as much trouble getting
> it working as he did.
This is
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 02:36:17PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, Adam Turoff wrote:
> > Don't laugh. It's here now. It's called XSLT. :-)
>
> Um, that's not what the article was talking about The proposal is to use
> an XML syntax t
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 03:48:27PM -0400, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Why can't a general-purpose programming language be augmented with XML for
> internal documentation purposes?
You mean like C#? :-)
Z.
On Mon, Jul 09, 2001 at 01:37:36PM -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2001, ivan wrote:
>
> > http://www.ora.com/news/vhll_1299.html
>
> Fascinating article, but his point about XML source code struck my funny
> bone. I've certainly heard the argument before - most recently in Dr.
> Dobbs
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 02:08:58AM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> Uh, C++ virtual methods can be overloaded on a per-object basis, not
> just a per-class basis, since the object drags around its virtual jump
> table with it wherever it goes, so the jump can get compiled into
> "jump to the address
On Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 12:48:54AM -0400, Bryan C . Warnock wrote:
> Okay, fun's over. Back to work.
>
> There was a Perl Documentation BOF that was scheduled for 6:30 Friday;
> however, it seems none of the folks who showed up actually called it, and
> none of the folks who called it actually
On Thu, Oct 24, 2002 at 12:26:41PM -0300, Adriano Nagelschmidt Rodrigues wrote:
> Luke Palmer writes:
> > Lisp is implemented in C, and C's macros are certainly not essential
> > to its functionality. But think of what macros in general provide:
> >
> > * Multi-platform compatability
> >
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 01:40:59PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> The general Pro's and Con's of POD seem to be:
>
> PRO
> ===
> simple, concise, limited, extensible, forgiving
> easy to convert to XXX, easy to write, easy to read, easy to ignore
> separates block/inline markup, no special editor
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 03:50:34PM -0800, Damien Neil wrote:
> POD parsers also go to a fair amount of trouble to infer syntax. For
> example, a function name like this() will be rendered differently by
> many POD processors. This is a good thing, in that you don't have to
> litter your documenta
On 10/28/05, Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The code is designed well enough that adding new features is quick and
> easy. Unfortunately, whenever I need to change my code I fire up a Web
> server and view the results in the browser and then write the tests
> after I've written the code (this is
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 08:36:20PM -, Smylers wrote:
> I was wondering whether it'd be better to have this specified per
> C rather than per C. That'd permit something a long the
> lines of:
>
> sub days_in_month(Str $month, Int $year)
> {
>
> }
>
> Perhaps there are only some e
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 01:53:28PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> And in those rare cases where you really do need partial caching, the
> simplest solution is to split the partially cached subroutine into a
> fully cached sub and an uncached sub:
>
> sub days_in_month(Str $month, Int $year)
> {
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:58:11PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
> --- Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It doesn't matter whether some of the values are cheap lookups
> > while other values are "complex calculations". Once a cached sub
> > is
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 01:58:11PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
> --- Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think you're trying to overoptimize something here. I can't see
> > a benefit to caching only sometimes. If there is, then you probably
> > w
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 02:20:01PM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
> --- Paul Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How about the same way as one would do it now? Presumably we won't
> > all
> > forget how to program when Perl 6 comes out.
>
> I think you've missed the point. The original poster (
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 11:37:58AM -0800, David Whipp wrote:
> I was reading the "Partially Memorized Functions" thread, and the thought
> came to mind that what we really need, is to define a different
> implementation of the method for a specific value of the arg. Something
> like:
>
> sub days_
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
> other syntax, as:
>
> foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
>
> I'm wondering whether Pe
On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 10:16:50AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2003 at 12:55:56PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
> > I'm not a Lisp enthusiast, by and large, but I think he makes some
> > interesting observations on language design. Take a look if you're
> > feeling adventurous...
>
>
On Fri, Jan 24, 2003 at 01:00:26PM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> > The problem with cons/car/cdr is that they're fundemental operations.
> > Graham *has* learned from perl, and is receptive to the idea that
> > fundemental operators should be huffman encoded (lambda -> fn). It
> > would be easy to
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:24:50AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
> --- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > At 8:47 AM + 1/28/03, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > >> $ref[$key]
> > >>
> > >> an array or hash look-up???
> > >
> > >Decided at runtime?
> >
> > How? People use strings as array ind
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 06:38:36PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "ML" == Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ML> Along those lines, the closest I've been able to come so far to a
> ML> usable two-sentence definition is:
>
> ML> -- A list is an ordered set of scalar values.
>
On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:21:51PM -0500, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> And what happens if a programmer wants to have two different variables,
> of two different types, with the same name, such as @data and %data?
>
> Without sigils, it cannot be done.
Vast numbers of C, C++, C#, Java, Python, Lisp
On Tue, Mar 25, 2003 at 09:25:30PM -0500, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> Adam Turoff wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 24, 2003 at 08:21:51PM -0500, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> > > And what happens if a programmer wants to have two different
> > > variables, of two different types,
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 09:19:36AM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> To what extent should the (presumably library-side) ability to parse a
> given markup language influence Perl 6's core language design? (which
> is what this list is nominally about.) I think this ought to
> approximate to "none at all
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 10:44:02PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> You must not be following Perl 6 closely enough, then. Perl 6 is a
> "real" programming language now, as opposed to a "scripting" language.
Um, I've followed Perl6 closely enough to know that the distinction
between "real langauge" an
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:34:14AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> And I don't see what's stopping someone from writing Dispatch::Value.
>
> use Dispatch::Value;
> sub foo($param is value('param1')) {...}
> sub foo($param is value('param2')) {...}
>
> What it seems you're wanting is it to
On Mon, Jun 09, 2003 at 01:26:22PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Multimethod dispatch?
> Adam Turoff asked if multimethod dispatch (MMD) was really *the* Right
> Thing (it's definitely *a* Right Thing) and suggested that it would be
> more Perlish to allow the progr
Apologies if I've missed some earlier discussions on multimethods. The
apocolypses, exegesises and synopses don't seem to say much other than
(a) they will exist and (b) wait for apocolypse 12 for more information.
Looking over RFC 256[*] and Class::Multimethods[**] it sounds like the
intent is t
Damian just got finished his YAPC opening talk, and managed to allude
to dispatching and autoloading.
As it *appears* today, regular dispatching and multimethod dispatching
are going to be wired into the langauge (as appropriate). Runtime
dispatch behavior will continue to be supported, including
On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 09:44:52AM -0400, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > As it *appears* today, regular dispatching and multimethod dispatching
> > are going to be wired into the langauge (as appropriate). Runtime
> > dispatch b
On Mon, Jun 16, 2003 at 06:31:54PM -, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> For methods, each object is ultimately responsible for deciding what to
> do when a method is called. Since objects generally share a class-wide
> vtable, the classes are mostly responsible for dispatch. The dispatch
> method can, i
On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 01:06:03PM -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
> Also, given that asynchronous IO is a fairly unpopular programming
> technique these days (non-blocking event-loop IO and blocking
> threaded IO are far more common), I would think long and hard before
> placing support for it as a core
On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 03:20:26PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Acknowledgements, Announcements and Apologies
> First of all, I plead insanity for my mistake of last week's summary.
> PONIE does not stand for 'Perl On New Internal Architecture', it
> obviously stands for 'Perl On New Im
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 10:49:40PM -0600, Nick Pinckernell wrote:
> The idea is: a structured Javadoc style system for Perl. It would be very
> dependant on multiline comments (I've seen the Perl 6 RFC).
>
> I think this idea would be really good for Perl 6, because, in my opinion,
> POD is lacki
On Thu, Jul 24, 2003 at 10:55:42AM -0600, Nick Pinckernell wrote:
> I agree with the first three items right out of
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/5.pod
> 1. IT'S NOT INTUITIVE
"Intuitive" is one of those meaningless buzzwords like "maintainable".
It sounds good, but it's meaningless. See MJD's ta
On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 11:52:37AM +0100, Adrian Howard wrote:
> Three I would thoroughly recommend, although not Perl related in any
> way, are:
>
> Lessons Learned in Software Testing: a Context-driven Approach
> Cem Kaner, James Bach
> Publisher: John Wiley & Sons Inc; ISBN
On Wed, Aug 20, 2003 at 09:46:07PM -0500, Danny R. Faught wrote:
> Re: The Craft of Software Testing...
>
> Adam Turoff wrote:
> >It's out of print and nearly impossible to find. I haven't read it yet,
> >so I can't say whether it is as seminal as McBreen say
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:14:32 +0100, H.Merijn Brand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Tue 14 Dec 2004 16:04, "Clayton, Nik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > I've normally got enough going on in my head when writing code,
> > worrying about the house style should not be one of them.
>
> Wrong. It shoul
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 14:21:40 -0800, Kevin Scaldeferri
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 14, 2004, at 2:10 PM, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > Yes. Ditch emacs. It knows only the *wrong* styles.
>
> uh... yeah... okay. You realize elisp is Turing-complete, right?
Um, yeah. Right. My cat is Turing
On Tue, Sep 14, 2004 at 12:31:44PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> this is how we ported a PL/I compiler from a prime [...]
This is how most bootstrapping works. Here's a more detailed
description of how Squeak bootstraped itself:
http://users.ipa.net/~dwighth/squeak/oopsla_squeak.html
Z.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 01:03:19PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Schwern observed:
> >This may be a consequence of the example used
> >
> > while $n++ then $foo > $bar
> >
> >which I immediately associated with.
> >
> > if $n++ then $foo > $bar
>
> Yeah, I can certainly see that.
>
> Perh
On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 03:41:27AM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Some of you may remember (and some wish we could forget) a ramble I
> posted about six months back about traffic lights and language design
> and all the weird ways we get meaning out of such a small # of
> symbols. One of the t
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:54:26PM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 09:56:50PM +0100, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> > Could you please mention the DotGNU project also? We're also building,
> > among other things, a C# compiler and CLR runtime.
>
> I could do, but DotGNU is, as you
On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 01:32:32PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Right, but FORTH's not an interpreted language, generally speaking.
No, but PostScript is. :-)
(...as if that wasn't completely obvious...)
Z.
The beginnings of a Parrot FAQ can be found here:
http://www.panix.com/~ziggy/parrot.html
It'll be moved to dev.perl.org shortly, when there's more meat to it.
Contents:
1 General Questions
1. What is Parrot?
2. Why "Parrot"?
3. Is Parrot th
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:20:46PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> > 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
>
> Could the FAQ be ma
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 03:26:25PM -0500, Adam Turoff wrote:
> Expect another update tonight or tomorrow.
Here ya go. Same place as last time.
1 General Questions
1. What is Parrot?
2. Why "Parrot"?
3. Is Parrot the same t
On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 06:29:34PM -0800, Steve Fink wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2001 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Seriously, there are real answers to a whole lot of design questions. Ask
> > 'em and I'll get FAQable answers to 'em once and for all.
>
> Whee! Ok. Some of these are
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 08:31:00AM -0800, Terrence Brannon wrote:
> Also, I thought Parrot was not "stack-based" If that is the case
> then why does Overview.pod say this:
>
> "Registers will be stored in register frames, which can be pushed and
> popped onto the register stack. For instance, a
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 01:20:42PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> On Monday 03 December 2001 12:31 pm, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> > Terrence Brannon writes:
> > > And then just write a RTL->JVM and RTL->CRL converter?
> >
> > I think it's time to collet these questions into a FAQ. Any volunteer
On Sun, Dec 09, 2001 at 07:46:46PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> Proposal:
>
> For background, revisit my proposed Bytecode Format (v2) at
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg05640.html.
> Although it is outdated, is gives a general gist of the direction of my
> thinking. In particular, pay no heed t
On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 08:40:41PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> [...] I'm also trying to get a regular, if I'm
> lucky every issue, Parrot/Perl 6 article in The Perl Review.
Speaking on behalf of TPR, the only bottleneck here is providing
a regular article/update on Parrot/Perl6 for each issue.
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 06:26:29PM -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> I'd like to amend my proposal. Suppose that the librarian *suggests*
> that RFC authors contact the WG chair when they submit RFCs that omit
> the implementation section? That way nobody is forced to do anything,
> and many
1 - 100 of 154 matches
Mail list logo
