On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:06:13PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
>
> I wonder if it'd be feasible to do lists something like:
>
> [...]
>
> =*> level1
> =>> level2
> =+>>> level3
> =* level4
> =>>> level3
> => level1
>
I personally like the idea of keeping
On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:16:53PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 12:06:13PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> > Or if the leading = really must be required:
> >
> > =*> level1
> > =>> level2
> > =+>>> level3
> > =* level4
> > =>>> l
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 12:33:09PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> : 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
>
> Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
>
> Larry
Does this mean that you can't use _ in numbers if the radix is higher than 16? (For
example, in ba
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 02:29:38PM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> It is interesting that no one has yet taken the time to start defining the
> terms we're using.
Good point. I volunteered to be keeper of the glossary a while ago,
but I never actively started creating one. That said, let's make t
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:03:32PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:24:50AM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> : Also, on this subject...what happens if I want to use "letter notation"
> : in a base higher than 36?
>
> What happens then is that pe
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:33:31PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:28:38AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
> > 1.23_e_4# ok?
>
> Hrm. This one is annoying, but I think it should be okay.
Are you sure? If so, can you explain why for me, because I don't
thin
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:02:02PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
> $b = 4294967296:1.2.3.4 # base 2**32
Hmm, interesting. Just as an aside, this gives me an idea: would it be
feasible to allow the base to be specified as an expression instead of
a constant? (I'm pretty sure it would be useful.) Fo
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:58:55PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> Hi all,
Hi Angel,
> This is the numeric literals part, reformated to follow Michael's
> outline.
My contribution is some copyediting and a few suggestions. Take what
you think is worthwhile.
> --
Greetings all,
Allison has asked me to be the coordinator to make sure that we all
send in our Contributor License Forms. You can read all the license
details at:
http://snipurl.com/bkt
Basically, what it comes down to is that we need everyone to sign a
document saying that, for all the
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 03:01:08PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 15 Nov 2002 at 12:02, Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> > A couple more corner cases:
> >
> > $a = 1:0; #error? or zero
>
> Shouldn't base-1 be:
>
> 1:0 == 10:0
> 1:1 == 10:1
> 1:11 == 10:2
> 1:111 == 10:3
> 1:1010111 == 10:5
> etc..
Nope
On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 08:13:58PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:51:05 -0800
> > From: Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > Therefore, in base 1, you can only use the digit 0. (Actually, I
> > think base 1 is a corner case--yo
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 03:14:52PM +, Graham Barr wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2002 at 11:12:15PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > 24*60*60:10 # one day in seconds, easy representation
>
> And the advantage of that over 24*60*60*10 would be ?
Well, for one thing, my
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 11:50:52PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Michael Lazzaro writes:
> > Let's summarize some of the string-to-num issues:
> >
> >my int $i = literal "0xff"; # 255
> >
> >
> > (3) -- We want to be able to parse a string as a number using a very
> > _specific
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:57:10AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
> --- Numeric Literals ---
>
> bin/oct/hex notation:
>
> 0b0110 # bin
> 0c0123 # oct
> 0x00ff # hex
> 0x00fF # hex, == 0x00ff
> 0x00FF # hex, == 0x00ff
I would assume that 0B0110, 0C0
Attributions getting confusing, so I have snipped and rewritten:
Dave Storrs writes:
> > Actually, this would be a good reason to have a function called
> > "literal" -- if it went both ways. So, I could do this:
> >
> >print literal(200+55):hex;
Ok folks, this is your Friendly Neighborhood License-Form Thug calling:
For those who came in late, we all need to sign and submit a license
form saying that the Perl Documentation Project gets the IP on the
documentation we write.
The form is here: http://www.snipurl.com/bkt/ It contains complet
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:55:12PM -0500, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
[eventual need to refuse stuff from unlicensed people]
>
> Hard and fast? ie, patches, even for a simple typo? Or new work, as
> corrections to a licensed document should imply concurrence.
I'm very glad to say that I'm not the o
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 12:11:21PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex"
> : functions to do a similar both-way thing, such that:
>
> What's a two-way function supposed to ret
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 01:23:04PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 11:57:33AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> > : and _I'm_ trying to promote the reuse of the old "oct/hex
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 05:51:17PM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
>
> It's going to be hard to beat sprintf( "%x", $i ) for clarity or
> conciseness.
Unfortunately, it's pretty easy to beat it for readability. It's also
a holdover from C, an ancestor language that we are (at least to a
degree) tryi
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 01:22:50AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> > I actually rather like MikeL's suggestion for the unary ops; clear,
> > concise, and highly readable. And look:
> >
> > my str $s = sprintf("%x", $i);# 30 characters
> > my str $s = hex $i; # 19 characters
> > my $
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 01:29:32AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
>
> > As a tangent...one of the things that has bothered me about "but" and
> > "is" for properties since the beginning is that they make for
> > excessively long code. Does this bother anyone else?
> >
> > --Dks
>
> Properties have b
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 03:26:09AM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote
> > best solution. I just wish there were some way to get away from those
> > dratted sprintf format strings.
>
> Well, for the general case, you could create convienence functions that
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 02:41:33AM -0800, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Storrs) writes:
>
> > send in our Contributor License Forms. You can read all the license
> > details at:
> > http://snipurl.com/bkt
>
> http://pdp.perl.org/contribut
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:10:53AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 10:16:54PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
> : As a tangent...one of the things that has bothered me about "but" and
> : "is" for properties since the beginning is that they make for
>
On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 09:43:08PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
[ how should printed lists behave? ]
> Please make the default behaviour 'debugging friendly' rather than
> 'pretty' if that makes any sense at all. In other words, it'd be handy
> if whatever got printed out included some unique ID for
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 12:10:11PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> On Friday, November 22, 2002, at 10:59 AM, Luke Palmer wrote:
> >> From: Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I've been under the impression that the following would _not_ work:
>
> $s ~~ //;
> print "I found $number";
On Mon, Nov 25, 2002 at 09:01:36AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> (Umm... what's a better name than "coloned form"? That term sounds
> really... um... bad.)
How about:
- explicit radix
- dotted notation
- DSD (Dot Separated Digits)
--Dks
On Fri, Nov 22, 2002 at 05:49:58PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Ideally, there could even be a per-list switch and a global switch
> > that says "(don't) show unique ids when interpolating lists/arrays".
> &
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:28:41PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> > I notice everyone still want Int context for eval of the block:
> > Pease don't forget about hashes. Is there such a thing as
> > 'hashkey context'?
>
> I doubt it. Unless you count Str context.
My understan
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 09:35:16PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
> is to use an alphabetic name (e.g. || vs or). perhaps the we
> could name this operator C: its vaguely remenicent of the
>
>@out = @in
>pp map { foo }
>pp grep { bar }
>pp sort { $^a <=> $^b }
I like the id
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 Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 03:58:54PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > From: Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > My understanding was that in Perl6, you could use pretty much anything
> > for a hashkey--string, number, object, whatever, and that it did not
> > get mashed d
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 10:37:10PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
>
> my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
At what moment does a junction actually create all of its states?
Hmm...perhaps a clearer way to say that is "At what moment does a
ju
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 12:13:49PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> [Dks wrote:]
> > So...are we intending that types and type safety will be like 'use
> > strict' (optional and only on request), or will they be like sigils
> > (mandatory, can't be turned off)? Or, perhaps, on by default but able
> >
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 10:35:47AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote:
> > - the ability for the programmer to set "limiters" (??better name??)
> > on the junction, which will specify how the junction should
> > collapse--e.g. always collapse to the l
On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 02:54:18PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
> "Michael Lazzaro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > After thinking about it a little more, I'll set myself on the "yes"
> > side. And propose either '===' or ':=:' to do it.
>
> Definitely '==='.
Hopefully, this thread has been settled
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 09:39:18PM -0500, James Mastros wrote:
> On 12/12/2002 8:07 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> > Ordinarily you'd test for subs with one of
> >
> > exists &Main::foo
> > &Main::foo.exists
> I thought that was now spelt exists %Main::{&foo} -- that the symbol
> tables were now
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:56:15AM -0500, John Siracusa wrote:
> Using the method/attribute named "id" for "this is the same object"
> comparisons is just plain bad Huffman coding. The "this is the same object"
> method/attribute should have a name that reflects the relative rarity of its
> use.
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:49:44AM -0600, Garrett Goebel wrote:
> Other common names for the proposed .id are:
>
> UUID: Universal Unique Identifier (DCE)
> GUID: Globally Unique Identfier (EFI)
>
> Of the 2, usage of "GUID" seems to be more common IMHO. Both of the above
> are identical in imple
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 09:32:02AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
> $obj.ID;
> $obj.IDENTITY;
FWIW, I favor the latter.
--Dks
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 06:47:39PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Mind you (purely devil's advocate), I'm not entirely sure the R-to-L
> > syntax truly _needs_ to be in Perl6. It's true I use it all the time,
> > but I can retrain to use L-to-R meth
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 08:26:25PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 06:47:39PM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> >> Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I haven't been arguing against his syn
On Mon, Dec 16, 2002 at 03:44:21PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 11:12 AM -0800 12/16/02, Dave Storrs wrote:
> >You find R2L easier to read, I find L2R
> >easier. TIMTOWDI. Perl6 should be smart enough to support both.
>
> Why?
>
> Yes, technically we can do bo
On Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 09:31:41AM +, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It seems like Perl6 is moving farther and farther away from Perl5's
> > (almost) typelessness.
>
> It depends what you mean by typed. Perl has always had
Attribution lists are getting a bit complex. This is in response to what Piers wrote
on Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 03:50:44PM +.
DKS
> > [specifying types]
> > Hm. I'm way short on sleep today, so I'm probably missing something,
> > but I don't see why Perl can't sort this out without a specific
I've been offline for a few days and haven't caught up on email yet
(nor, most likely, will I ever), so I hope no one else has already
done this, but
Attached is a file, msv.tar.gz which contains a simple script and .pm
file (*) for editing the string vtable. It asks you for a bunch of
typed
(As previously remarked, I'm trying to catch up from a few days offline,
so excuse me if this is OOD.)
On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Ken Fox wrote:
> The interpreter knows the internals of the stack structure and is
> responsible for managing it. To change the stack implementation, we'll
> have to caref
In strings.pod, the following string functions are documented and
(most|all) are already implemented:
DOCUMENTED:
chopn
concat
length
substr
string_nprintf
However, Perl5 also includes the following functions that operate on
or otherwise relate to strings:
only thing to the left of ->
is a scalar, it could reduce to this (in Perl5 terms):
# This Perl6:
for $_ -> $x { ... }
# is the same as this Perl5:
{
my $x = $_;
local ($_);
{ ... }
}
Dave Storrs
t to mean "skip over
> the following" rather than "skip to the following"), but I find "nobreak" also
> a bit strange. How about "proceed"?
>
> Ted
First, a 'me too' to everything Ted said.
Second, to me 'nobreak' is not sufficiently visually distinct from
'break'.
Dave Storrs
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> There is an issue of time--what do we do, for example, in the case:
>
> my $pi = Pi::Generate;
> if ($pi =~ /[a-z]) {
> print "There's a letter in here!\n";
> }
>
> if Pi::Generate returns a generator object that will calculate pi for
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> print "There's a letter in here!\n" if (substr($pi, 0, 200) =~ /[a-z]/);
*shrug* I actually did think of that when I first proposed this;
doesn't substr make a fresh copy of the string? (I honestly don't know.)
What happens if you take a s
ould confuse people into thinking that they will need to
manually dereference the variable, which they shouldn't need to do.
Is there a way to do this now? If not, will there be a way in
Perl6?
Dave Storrs
[Several people said something like "$var is rw will do it")
Ah, that's right. I had forgotten about this.
Thanks to everyone who responded.
Dave
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
[...]
> different either. I too think that the input file separator should have
> regexish features, if the programmer wishes so. Now, one can only set $/
[...]
> My thoughts would be: a DFA regex engine, i.e. a state machine which is
> controlled by the n
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Peter Scott wrote (with >):
[what is the purpose of having an explicit 'try']
> Well, for one, it makes it easier to see that a block is subject to
> exception handling if all you have to do is look at the beginning for 'try'
> rather than scan through it for a 'catch'.
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
> What if "try" were implied by the appearance of "catch" keywords, which
> expire at the close of their block?
>
> catch [EXCEPTION [, ...] ] BLOCK
> ,...
> BLOCK
[e.g.]
> catch Exception::MyDB, Exception::DBI {
>
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 07:39:33AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > How about instead we build the DFA [regex engine], with its more
> > limited syntax, but it must be manually turned on by use of a flag
> > (similar t
D'oh. s{2) .+^}{}
Mismatch between brain and fingers there somewhere, thanks for
pointing it out.
Dave
On 17 Aug 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 2) "express" should gu
This seems good...the HOF stuff seems to have pretty well accepted, and
the thumbtack notation with it.
Dave
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Clayton Scott wrote:
> > > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
> > > %record = loadrecord($studentID);
> > > with %record
n Wed, 16 Aug 2000 07:39:33 -0700 (PDT), Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> > The idea of having two different regex "languages" in Perl makes
> >me very, very nervous. Potential for confusion
>
> It should.
>
> However, I was talking about two different rgex imp
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, John Porter wrote:
> Huh? They need to be "globals", because the "with" mechanism
> is going to have to be able to write them into a symbol table.
> You can't do this with lexicals. (Well, maybe that'll be different
> in perl6?)
Well, if you're using the HOF nota
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> BTW, if we define C to map keys of a hash to named place holders
> in a curried expression, this might be a good thing:
>
> with %person {
> print "Howdy, ", ^firstname, " ", ^lastname;
> }
>
> # becomes
> sub {
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> > What should happen when the expression given to C, or
> > C evaluates to a negative number? I see three options:
[...]
> >
> > 3) C would then act as C and C would
> >act as C
> >
> I like #3 too, does that make a better conse
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, David L. Nicol wrote:
> Anyone for generalizing "select" to a more general "with" keyword
> which would operate on a limited hash and be syntactic sugar for
> replacing all appearances of unqualified variables that match
> the hash's keys with references into it?
>
>
On Fri, 18 Aug 2000, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 10:39:36AM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
> > "Using" might be an interesting alternative
>
> Reminds me of BASIC :-)
Works for me.
> > What if the hash keys we want to use are not valid scalar names? For examp
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> "Bryan C. Warnock" wrote:
> >
> > ... is the cause for this. All the discussion is taking place in the
> > master list before the sublists are spawned. You can only express the
> > opinion that foo is not bar and never should be so many times.
>
> I
If we are going to use this, I'd like to see us standardize on the
highest-precision (i.e. attosecond) version. While it's not necessary in
any application that I can currently think of and will probably never be
necessary in 90% of Perl applications, when you need it, you need it, and
if the cor
On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Michael Mathews wrote:
> Tom Christiansen said:
> > Because they don't nest.
>
> Nesting is a problem you don't really want to solve, in my opinion. The
> world gets real weird, real fast when you can nest and/or overlap comments.
> Not worth the trouble.
I disag
On 23 Aug 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> In any case, commenting out large blocks (more than one visual page)
> is highly confusing unless you can clearly see what is commented out,
> for example, by prefixing every line with a '#' or so.
I don't generally have trouble with this...most
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2000 18:21:00 -0700 (PDT), Larry Wall wrote:
> >If you want to save the world, come up with a better way to say "www".
> >(And make it stick...)
>
> "The world"? This problem only exists in English!
>
> We pronounce it something similar
Well, THAT was certainly specific, insightful, politely phrased, and
filled with pertinent advice on how to remedy the problem!
Alan, you're right about certain things...it's important that talented,
experienced people have the final say over the final product. However,
most of the problems in e
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, John Porter wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote:
> >
> > init_vars \{name => 'NONE'};
> > my @employees : size 50; # 50 entries, each a ref to 1 elem. hash
> > @employees = get_from_db('*');
> > f
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Myers, Dirk wrote:
> >Suppose you could specify the value with which all variables
> >in the enclosing scope should be initialized; for example:
>
> I haven't seen this either, but I suggest that it should be a set of
> pragmas:
> use init_scalar 0 ;
> use init_array () ;
On 13 Sep 2000, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Hildo Biersma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Piers Cawley wrote:
> > I'd like to use shorthands for A::B::C's Foo and X::Y::Z's Bar at the
> > same time.
>
> Well you can't. The patch that I pinched this RFC from is a lexically
How about if w
Um, with all due respect, Chris, I'm having a lot of trouble following
your reasoning. I currently work for a company that is in serious trouble
and may well go under; one of the contributing factors to that situation
may well have been that our senior management writes their own contracts
witho
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 06:40:10PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> > C should return what C currently
> > returns.
>
> Good.
I'll weigh in with a "me too" on this.
> > C should reset the hash iterator, instead of calling
> > C or C
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Hildo Biersma wrote:
> > =head1 TITLE
> >
> > Make length(@array) work
>
> Counter-proposal: make length(@array) a syntax error. I don't feel like
> rewarding stupidity, I'd rather teach people how to do things properly.
As a general rule, I agree with Hildo tha
This is something fairly basic, but I haven't seen it in discussion or in
the RFCs. If I've missed it, my apologies.
In Perl 5, when a variable is created, it is given the "undefined" value.
This can lead to lots of spurious "Use of uninit'd variable" warnings.
Suppose you could specify the val
On 14 Sep 2000, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
> 1. It requires the perl parser know about indentation. Of course we
>all know that tabs are 8 characters wide (I myself make a point of
>bludgeoning anyone who says otherwise), but do we really want to
>open this can of worms?
No, b
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Simon Cozens writes:
> > > Nice!
> > Efficient!
> > Practical!
> >
> > Choose two.
>
> I take this oblique comment to mean that it'd bloat the op-tree too
> much?
Well, suppose we simply add the -FOO (choose your letter) flag to
perl...
.
Dave
On Wed, 13 Sep 2000, Dave Storrs wrote:
> How about if we added a list, @NAMES, into which you could assign
> namespace shortcuts, something like this:
>
> package main;
>
> push @NAMES, ("A::B::C" => 'ABC
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 18:14:49 -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>
> >The perl 5 -> perl 6 translator should [recursively handle eval]
>
> Blech, no. eval should stay eval. People are responsible for generating
> Perl6 compatible code, if they construct
On Fri, 15 Sep 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On 15 Sep 2000 02:09:23 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> >A version of Memoize.pm should be added into the Perl6 standard
> >library, and it should be added as a pragmatic module (i.e. memoize.pm).
>
> I would rather have a flag when generating t
It seems to me that everyone in this thread pretty much agrees that this
is a good idea, but has one of the following reservations:
1) Tracking sufficient information to be able to report errors at the
exact spot they happen involves bloating the optree a lot and slowing down
the whole program;
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
> The argument against my reasoning would be if the bulk of people making
> this mistake are *not* coming from C. I don't know.
I have a feeling we're either arguing the same side without
realizing it, or we're just having a straight-up conversati
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> And then there's the lexical variable issue too:
>
>The default variable scope rules for Ruby (default: local) are
>much better suited for medium-to-large scale programming tasks;
>no "my, my, my" proliferation is needed for safe Ruby prog
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> This is an interesting comment to be made about an interesting side effect of
> this proposal.
[snip]
> (1) array elements can be accessed by name
> (2) member data can be looked up quicker (by array index, rather than by
> hashed name)
[snip]
> new
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Adam Turoff wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 08:07:33AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> > I think I would be
> > guardedly in favor of changing the default scope from global to local
> > (although I have the feeling there is something I'm no
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Adam Turoff wrote:
> Background: RFCs should be in development until frozen or retired.
>
> A status change from "Frozen" to "Retired" may be acceptable. Such
>
> So, what's everyone else think? I really don't want to write up
> an RFC about this. :-)
My thoug
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >This RFC proposes that the internal cursor iterated by the C function
> >be stored in the pad of the block containing the C, rather than
> >being stored within the hash being iterated.
>
> Then how do you specify which iterator is to be reset when
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Steve Fink wrote:
> 1 my ($x, $y, $z);
> 2 $z = 1;
> 3 my $logfile = "/tmp/log";
> 4 $x = 1 if cond();
> 5 print $x+$y;
> 6 undef $z;
> 7 print $z;
>
> --> use of uninitialized variable $y in line 5 (compile time)
> --> possible use of uninitialized variable $x in line 5 (
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Eric Roode wrote:
> foo();
> print $x;
>
> Generate a warning, or not? Which one? Remember, foo() may initialize $x.
My suggest (FWIW) would be that, if there is no execution path
which leads to $x being defined in the second line, then a "Use of
uninit'
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2000 07:07:42 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> >Many newbies think of the number of
> >elements in an array as its "length"
>
> Doesn't this reflect C's idea of "a string is an array of characters"?
> Which isn't the idea behind strings
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> On 19 Sep 2000 09:23:00 +0300, Ariel Scolnicov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm planning to withdraw RFC184 ("Perl should support an interactive
> > mode"), due to lack of interest. There was little discussion of it,
I seem to have m
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I'm sure there are many times when pack should have been used but it
> got hacked together with something else. The prime example is [...]
I must admit I'm with Michael on this one. I've been writing Perl
on and off for two or three ye
On 25 Sep 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Remove -X
>
> The prefered mechanism for file tests should be more legible, using
> terms like 'readable(FOO)' and 'writeable(FOO)' instead of the
> =head1 MIGRATION ISSUES
> Perl programmers happy with the -X syntax will need to
Something that I am a little stuck on...here is my understanding of the
way Perl is currently distributed and what it all means. I think I must
be confused about something...could someone straighten me out?
1) Works developed in Perl may be distributed under either the GPL or the
AL, dealer's ch
On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Hugo wrote:
> :=item *
> :/(foo)_C<\1>_bar/
>
> Please don't do this: write C or /(foo)_\1_bar/, but
> don't insert C<> in the middle: that makes it much more difficult to
> read.
Sorry; that was a global-replace error that I missed on
proofreading.
> :mean dif
101 - 200 of 203 matches
Mail list logo
