in some distant future version of Perl, perhaps somewhere
> around the year 2168.
That's a long time for implementation :-)
Well, this is really only a problem for p52p6, I suppose.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"At IBM, we have no hesitation to steal or b
hat +%hash will return the number of elements. It
should be safe to assume that +@array does the same.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"If you are going to have delusions, you may as well have really good ones"
-- Marcus Cole, B5
$foo--;
> invoke($cont);
> }
>
> When you invoke a continuation you put the call scratchpads and lexical
> scratchpads back to the state they were when you took the continuation.
If you restore the lexicals, how does this ever finish?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL P
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:42:03 +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > When you invoke a continuation you put the call scratchpads and lexical
> > scratchpads back to the state they were when you took the continuation.
>
> If you restore the lexicals, how does this ever finish?
Ne
er explictly ask for
the other options (of which there are sevaral), we only give them exactly
what they want. Perl 5 gives you the most flexible way by default (pass by
ref, modifiable), and makes one other option (pass by val, modifiable) easy,
but has occassionally surprising results, such as aut
rators used (:= inside the rule, = inside the code)
seems a bit confusing to me; I can't see that they're really doing anything
different:
/ $x := (gr\w+) /vs/ (gr\w+) { let $x = $1 } /
Shouldn't they both use C< := > ?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Some more data?
No, no more. Please, no more...
-- Yanick, examining perl's strange behaviour
# error
Bytecode iteration means that this just ends up calling the normal scalar op,
and stuffing the result into an array.
Looks like I'm in favour of bytecode iteration for hyperoperators after all.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I is for indent, which rarely
spell it wrong? There needs to be some way of
indicating whether or not the lexical gets set - that way the strict pragma
(or perl6 equivalent) can catch typos.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"To be considered half as good as Microsoft,
Linux has to work twice as fast.
Fortunately, this is easy."
user defined operator;
it could actually want one scalar and one array operand. Maybe we should
have multiple carets to denote hyper-hyper-operators if that's what the
user wants:
@a = @b ^^* @c;
If hyperoperators get transformed into loops behind the scenes, this
shouldn't be too hard to implement.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Override self destruct? (y/n@^%i@&$#
NO CARRIER
ush receives the contents of
@b in its @list parameter. 6 is an explicit arrayref, so that's what push gets
given. I would argue that 7 is like 6, except that it copies @b's elements.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reporter: Mr Gandhi, what do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.
oized is something
is pre{ $this <= 42 }
is pre{ $that == $this / 2 }
{
# implementation goes here
} is post{
# postcondition 1
} is post{
# postcondition 2
}
If you want an abstract method, just omit the implementation block.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PR
ed condition has to be of the form
C<< x > 9 >> or any other value lower than 10. C<< a || b >> is weaker than
C<< a >>
> Are there
> other ways to do it, just to mull them over?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I remember being
l marked as such,
which (at least so far) Perl6 constructors aren't.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The Hotmail migration is becoming the IT equivalent of painting-the-Forth-
bridge, evidently. Once you've think you've finished migrating one end, more
FreeBSD box
eans? I really liked the idea that not and xor were
just the same operator, but unary/binary. Otherwise, we have ! for boolean
negation only, while ^ does the same thing for other types, as well as xor
for everything. I don't mind leaving ! in as a synonym.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL
," it pretty much can't be the same as any of the other
operators, since that introduces ambiguity all over the place. This is
unfortunate, since perl seems to use every printable ASCII character for
something. Using French quotes gets around this, since they aren't being
used for an
,$next){
...
if $val ~~ something_or_other() {
my $quux = $next();
...
}
}
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"...I find myself wondering if Larry Ellison and Tim Curry
were separated at birth...hmm..."
-- Tom Good
>> but reads better than "same" ("Same as what?").
> >
> > Insert obligatory reference to Eiffel here, which IIR uses the word
> > "once":
But that means "once per system", not "once per unique argument list".
--
Pet
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:30:24 +, Peter Haworth wrote:
> So to get the same yield context, each call to the coroutine has to be from
> the same calling frame. If you want to get several values from the same
> coroutine, but from different calling contexts, can you avoid the need to
>
ber the first capture in one alternative, does that
affect the numbering of the other alternatives?
# $4$4
rx/ [ $4:=(a) | (b) ] /;
> Note that, outside a rule, C<@1> is simply a shorthand for C<@{$1}>
Is @/ also a shorthand for @{$/} ?
--
Peter Haworth
lFork only does one fork at
a time, where MultiFork does them all at once. It's also much easier
to give descriptive labels with SerialFork, so the output of the test
program is much clearer.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
perl -Mstrict -we '$_ = "goto F.print chop;\n
# they can do if their order is refused, all they can do is try another
# shop, or give up and go home
method buy_book($book){
$random_bookshop.order($book);
CATCH{ fail Err::BookObviouslyDoesntExist; }
}
}
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hestons' First Law: I qualify virtually everything I say.
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:24:47 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 16:57:51 +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:17:05 +0200, TSa wrote:
> > > Piers Cawley wrote:
> > > >>Exactly which exception is continued?
> > > >
rectly.
>
> Note that an end-bracket, ], must be escaped within the \qq[] construct.
> This allows the parser to correctly parse the construct.
Don't embedded qq[] strings obey the normal qq[] rules? That is, will
all brackets need escaping, or just unbalanced brackets? I'd hope for
sort must specify its return type so that part's
declaration may be found.
That's all fine for the standard/builtin methods on arrays, but its a bit
unperl-like to force users to highly specify everything. Of course, if they
do declare methods with all the bells and whistles, they get the b
On 10 Dec 2002 15:34:11 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Haworth) writes:
> > To know whether the method takes a block, you need to know how it's been
> > declared. In other words, the type of @a needs to be known to find
> > grep's declaratio
g whitespace, which is
> not the behaivor <<>> will have (if it acts like qw(), at any rate.)
I hate this special case. Why is there no way of specifying the removal of
leading empty elements with any other separator string?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PRO
On 10 Dec 2002 17:25:34 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Haworth) writes:
> > Fair enough; that simplifies things somewhat. However, you can't tell
> > how many arguments they take. How do you parse this without the
> > programmer specifying a great d
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:02:18 -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> Peter Haworth:
> # @b = @a.grep { /\S/ }, $c;
> #
> # how does the compiler know whether $c is an argument to grep,
> # or another element to be assigned to @b?
>
> The same way it does when it sees a normal sub?
>
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:08:25 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Peter Haworth wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:17:57 -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> >
> >>Again, C<< "STRING".split(' ') >> is different than
> >> C<< "STR
[1]; # array-like
$a['1'];# array-like
$a{1}; # hash-like
$a{'1'};# hash-like
Maybe it is the right way round, and I've read your remarks the wrong way.
Or maybe it is the value type which determines the type of access at the PMC
level, and it
ature), or split if they don't.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Warning! Your Operating System is out of date!
It can be replaced by a more memory abusive Operating System.
Please contact your System Vendor for details.
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:49:14 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 1:37 PM + 1/10/03, Peter Haworth wrote:
> >On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 16:40:20 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> #10 We do MI, but we don't instantiate a class' attributes multiple
> >>times if its i
he method has been redefined in the meantime. We shouldn't
prevent something useful just because it's not universally applicable.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I can talk on this stuff for hours when given insufficient discouragement."
-- Dan Sugalski
nt the base class method to be called, just because parrot
does things in a peculiar order. Well, I know it's the same order that perl5
does things, but it's still peculiar.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I'm converting my data to 64-bit signed times, sto
etter to me. I'm going to be surprised by the
behaviour of code that works like yours for a long time before I get used to
it.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I have to continue using UUCP for sentimental reasons"
-- Ian Lance Taylor
piler to figure things out, it's going to be even
harder for the programmer.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I think this is one of those traumatic things eggs have to face
to prepare a good omelette."
-- Jarkko Hietaniemi
e believe that in preference to the operator.
Don't we trust the programmer more than the data? I want this code to
produce 4660, 22136, 2832, 3394; not 4660, 22136, 4, 42.
for '1234','5678','0b10','0d42' {
say 0x $_;
}
--
Peter Haworth [
t;<>> variant
* interpolation allowed in the double quoted variant.
That said, I really wish we could keep perl5's $hash{key}. It's obviously a
subscript, and I use constant bareword keys much more frequently than zero-arg
sub/builtin calls in hash subscripts.
--
Peter
nce
> to a closure outside of its official "sub" scope, it is illegal to
> return from it.
Presumably this illegality only applies to closures not officially
declared as subs, methods or submethods?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever."
eezing and DOD, or
two freezes).
Bear in mind that I have never used threads and can't remember how they work
in parrot, so this may be an irrelevant question.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"You're not going to watch the eclipse in yesterday's underpants?"
sh itself to take
nearly as much space as the frozen structure; a GC run in the middle of
freezing should only be a problem if you run out of *unreclaimable* memory.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Nothing in the definition of the word `word' says
that a word has to be in a dictionary to be called one."
-- Anu Garg
mbedded applications or systems) If we make it so freezing
> is not a guaranteed possibility at destroy time then this can't happen and
> it lessens the utility of the system some.
>
> We can, if we choose, loosen the restriction later if sufficient reason is
> presented. Can
more complex than a native type is inherently
recursive. Either you use up call stack space recursing over the PMCs, or
you need an explicitly manage a stack/queue of PMCs not yet serialised.
Have I missed some wonder of modern computing, or just something so obvious
I can't see it?
--
On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 17:33:17 +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
> [stuff he didn't mean to send]
Sorry. Looks like I hit Send instead of Cancel.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"this system is slightly less secure than putting your IP address and
root password in big le
erl5? We can obviously
invent suitable syntax for perl6, so that it can cope with arbitrarily named
packages, but we don't have that luxury with most of the other languages we
want to support.
Then the question becomes, "What about namespace clashes?", which Tim has
already addres
te
values, this isn't thread safe (please excuse my lack of PASM syntax
knowledge):
classoffset Ioff, Pobj, Sclass
# Some other thread calls addattribute on Pobj's class
getattribute Pattr,Pobj,Ioff
# Now we have the value of the wrong attribute in Pattr
--
Peter Haworth
t the carets, like $got and $expected do, or
are they required, like &^sub ?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In Cyberspace no one can hear you scream, unless they have a sound card.
a
decade ago, and my memory may be faulty.
Anyway, couldn't you say this?
&assert_wth_func :=
sub(&^sub is constant, $^expected is constant, $^got, $message){
&^sub($^expected, $^got, $message);
};
I'm not sure if that still curries appropriately, though.
--
e how references to sub arguments
are compiled anyway, in which case there's no problem.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Master, does Emacs have the Buddha nature?" the novice asked.
The Chief Priest had been in the temple for many years and could be
relied upon to
's another
> argument for case differentiation. By this argument, the rethink should
> go in the opposite direction, giving us catch/CATCH.
I like that, especially because it makes the try with no CATCH read better:
try { ... } # But what happens if we fail?
catch { ... } # Implicit CAT
eady be case-folded for speed.
>
> Hm, is that going to work ? What about a rx like /^a(?i:b)C/ where the
> case insensitivity only applies to part of the pattern ?
Or worse, in /^a(b)c/i, where you want to capture the original character,
not the case-folded version?
--
P
le methods have to be defined? If the latter, where
do we stop?
> >In particular, I was wondering about shift/unshift, push/pop on the
> >PerlArray PMC. Am I missing something obvious?
>
> Ah, those. In that case you use the vtable methods I've forgotten. :)
Will these all map t
[Apologies for the late reply. Still catching up]
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:51:01 -0500, David L. Nicol said:
> What if its a method of anything in an array? $_ is already
> a reference to the object on the array in for loops rather
> than a copy of it. What if we make change be not something a
53 matches
Mail list logo
