On Mon, 23 May 2005 14:58:20 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How about "zephyr".
No! That's the name of a project I'm working on dang it ;)
On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 13:11:34 -0400, BÁRTHÁZI András <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hi,
I just would like to share it with you. We had a weekend at the lake
Balaton on the last weekend, where I had a talk about Perl 6. The guys
liked it (the girls had sunbath during the event :), and one of them
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:00:01 -0400, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
2. Is anyone working on making a Win32 module for Perl6 yet, or porting
over the p5 one? If not, I may be willing to make one, along with some
help from friends.
If I do, does anyone have any pointers or suggestions for me wh
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 13:55:17 -0400, Mark A. Biggar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
After some further thought (and a phone talk with Larry), I now think
that all of these counted-level solutions (even my proposal of _2.foo(),
etc.) are a bad idea. They have a similar problems to constructs like
"next 5;
On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:21:06 -0400, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matt Creenan skribis 2005-04-23 14:19 (-0400):
Hm.. didn't really think of that. Though, how often would that really
happen?
Often -- this is exactly the same problem as Python has with its
significant indenting
On Sat, 07 May 2005 01:12:02 -0400, Mark A. Biggar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Actually if we define |...| at all, I'd prefer it mean abs(), its usual
mathmatical meaning.
I agree. I think || is just confusing.
I thought about $blockname <= { ... }, but <= is obviously taken, as is <==
So here's
On Sat, 07 May 2005 01:47:08 -0400, Matt Creenan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So here's some random ideas that probably make no sense ($ can be
optional.. don't know)
*snip*
That brings me to another idea. Is $_ as an array used? @_?
This relates back to the discussion on topic
I've always thought that particular bit of sugar was rather dangerous. I'd
even prefer a longhand:
$foo either 0 or split();
to the troublesome double-usage of C<::>
I think I'd prefer that as well, since it has the advantage of not having to
use the evil shift key. Though i don't think it s
I think I'd prefer that as well, since it has the advantage of not having
to use the evil shift key. Though i don't think it stands out as much as
it should.
I hate to reply to my own message, but...
How about
$foo??split()!!0;
for a touch of craziness. Or is !! not usable? Actually, just igno
hash_4.exe crashes, trying to read memory at 0x when running tests
for hash.
t/src/hash..NOK 5# Failed test (t/src/hash.t at line 163)
# got: 'Can't spawn ".\t\src\hash_4.exe": Bad file descriptor at
lib/Parrot/Test.pm line 61.
# '
# expected: ''
# '.\t\src\hash_4.
>> parrot\mmd.c(32) : warning C4098: 'mmd_dispatch_pmc' : 'void' function
returning a value
void /* Shouldn't this be PMC * instead? */
mmd_dispatch_pmc(struct Parrot_Interp *interpreter,
PMC *left, PMC *right, PMC *dest, INTVAL function)
>> parrot\encoding.c(37) : warnin
Cool, can I write my software with it now? ;)
>> BTW, tonight I managed to get Parrot to call a few Win32 APIs
successfully
>> using NCI (not that it won't have been done before, but it was the first
time for me... ;-)). I've attached an example that shows how to call the
MessageBoxA function. N
It just goes to show.. the perl community has already thought of
everything..
-Original Message-
From: Luke Palmer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 12:41 PM
To: Carissa
Cc: Perl Language
Subject: Re: Operators that keep going and going...
Carissa writes:
> The oth
13 matches
Mail list logo
