At 04:53 PM 10/1/00 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 11:33 AM 10/1/00 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>>But, setting aside my visceral reaction to changing array bases, you have
>>precisely the same problem here that has scuppered my intent to file an
>>RFC for hashes with fixed k
At 01:38 PM 10/5/00 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, John Porter wrote:
>
> > Peter Scott wrote:
> > > the idea is to be an extension of Larry's creative thinking
> > > process. Neither of us is deciding what goes into Perl 6, and
> neither i
ch constructs,
and say "if you want your programs to be compilable (or compile to
something a heck of a lot lighter), say 'use strict "compilation"' or
whatever"?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 01:10 PM 10/24/00 +0200, Philip Newton wrote:
>On 23 Oct 2000, at 15:40, Peter Scott wrote:
> > What about introducing a pragma which either (a) promises not to use such
> > things, or (b) throws an exception if the program does use such
> constructs,
> > and say "
nd good tool support (e.g. emacs modes).
Arrgh, you're giving me WEB flashbacks... I nearly went blind trying to
read that stuff...
As I said earlier, why don't we just define a syntax for *anything* to be
used as an extension language, and let the, er, market decide?
--
Pete
ted to make the right argument an expression to be
interpreted as a search pattern (since I have qr//).
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 11:39 PM 12/20/00 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 20, 2000 at 03:36:48PM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> > Should this second paragraph still be true for Perl 6? I have at times
> > wanted to do something of the form
> >
> > perl -lwe '$x = "x";
language@perl.org/index.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/perl6-internals@perl.org/index.html
Although I cannot find an article referring to what you mention. It does
sound familiar though.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
>
>or fname could be used instead of rval all through it.
Ah, an homage to Pascal :-)
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
in C style casting capability, with all the evil that brings
>with it, including the ability to bittwiddle perl structures from
>within perl, which is a feature migrating C programmers miss.
This migrated C programmer misses it like intestinal flu.
Can you come up with one remotely useful example?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 08:44 AM 2/6/01 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 05, 2001 at 11:04:06PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Granted, if this was all done with trusted servers it would be really neat,
> > but...
>
>TANSTAATS.
Not even with the appropriate amount of PKI/X.509 hand-wav
ubject to non-local control
flow rules.
I'd rather have the 'try' there for the same reason I want to see the 'do'
in "do { ... } while ..." (well, leaving aside the fact that it would be
unparseable without it). But I certainly understand your preference.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 05:07 PM 2/7/01 -0500, John Porter wrote:
>Peter Scott wrote:
> > Sorry, I wasn't clear. Let me rephrase. The 'try' helps me determine
> that
> > the following block is going to be subject to exception handlers which
> will
> > immediately foll
At 02:17 PM 2/7/01 -0500, John Porter wrote:
>Peter Scott wrote:
> >
> > I want the 'try' there for my sake, not Perl's; ... it
> > helps alert me that the following block is subject to non-local control
> > flow rules.
>
>Huh? Down t
or
>tar/gzip or other?
Eh? I thought PPM was simply "perl -MCPAN -e install" for Windows users,
pointed to a set of modules which have XS content that they'd had to fiddle
with to port to Win32.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
ally seen any code that makes
use of it. I have grown somewhat tired of writing, and teaching, "return
if $AUTOLOAD =~ /:DESTROY$/", however.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
), albeit in with a messy error.
>OK, script crashing with an uncaught exception isn't nice, but it's nicer
>than silently losing data IMHO.
I think you'll find this addressed already in RFCs 70, 80, and 151. At
least, that was my intention.
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/70.html
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/80.html
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/151.html
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
trying to claim credit for
RFC 70 here.
>http://dev.perl.org/rfc/70.html
>http://dev.perl.org/rfc/80.html
>http://dev.perl.org/rfc/151.html
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
bility since the declaration
is decoupled from the reason - sub AUTOLOAD - for it being there), but the
point still stands.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
enough controversy I can also ask about things which are
labelled as both functions and operators :-)
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 11:49 AM 2/15/01 -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "Peter" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Peter> Quite. But on a tangent, I see no good reason why this shouldn't be
>Peter> given the same interpretation as "my
the additional connotation that implies
>'no strict', and 'no warn'.
no 'warnings'
> Seems simple enough to me.
Yes, that's what I thought; but this has generated more heat than light, at
least on the times I've brought it up, e.g.,
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00025.html
Better get the asbestos underwear ready.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
ead the archives... I am the wrong person to ask for a statement of
the opposing viewpoint...
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
7;t want to DWIM this. Would it be so bad to have to type
GetOptions (foo => \my ($foo),
bar => \my $bar);
tie my ($shoe) => $tring;
if we made 'my' consistent with all other functions that take lists
(yes-I-know-it's-not-a-function)?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 09:56 AM 2/16/2001 -0500, John Porter wrote:
> > As for the -q thing, I think it is far *less* of a burden to add "use
> > strict" and "use warnings" when you're writing a big piece of code. When
> > you're writing 5 lines, every extra character counts. When you're
> > writing 500 or 5000 lines
t. You're just charging back and forth over the same
>old No Man's Land. No matter what the decision, one side or the other
>will be cheesed off and no real net gain will be had.
>
>Good programmers will still be good programmers and bad programmers
>will still be bad, no matter how many switches you flip or pragmas you
>make them use.
True, but I'm not claiming that changing the default will accomplish this,
only that it will accomplish what I already described. Look, the docs
already say that the fact that -w is not the default is a bug. What should
we do, change the docs? Or leave it in there for P6 and build a new
language with an admitted bug in it from the beginning?
>No language will solve this. No Silver Bullet.
Yes, but not the point.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
hey had a good reason for doing so, and we should respect it and not be
bothered by it, or they don't know what they're doing and we shouldn't be
using their code. More likely the latter.
Right now, if I wanted to impose strictness on third-party modules, I'd
have to edit
At 09:36 PM 2/16/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 06:08:20PM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> > But if you want P6 to be so backwards
> > compatible that the largest issues are smaller than "@", an awful lot of
> > good stuff ain't gonna
into
modules for purposes of reuse, not because it's somehow more worthy of
error checking. I don't want to have to remember this invisible
action-at-a-vast-distance rule to figure out why code in different places
behaves differently wrt pragmas.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
is. If someone's developing code right now with "use
warnings", and they want to ship with warnings disabled, they gotta edit
the code anyway. How is commenting out "use warnings" at release time
different from inserting "no warnings" at release time?
And if they're developing the code all the way through without warnings (in
which case they don't deserve to have customers), then they'll just put "no
warnings" or -q in there from the start and there's no release editing
required.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
ny case, the mandate for Perl 6 design was
to consider everything fair game, within user-defined reason. We may well
eliminate bareword filehandles in Perl 6, just 'cos they no longer make
sense; seems we might as well go for everything we want to fix. If we
don't create a better language when we have the chance, someone outside of
Perl will do it and name it after a snake or something...
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 11:00 PM 2/16/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, Feb 16, 2001 at 06:52:22PM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> > S'not about saving keystrokes, as many times as I do type the same things
> > in every file; it's about giving newbies the right introduction to the
&
error because -M can only take one argument. But more importantly,
> > THIS IS NOT UNIVERSAL AND CANNOT WORK IN A UNIVERSAL SCOPE.
>
>Hmm, its damned silly that you can't give two modules on the command
>line.
???
$ perl -Mwarnings -Mstrict -le 'print keys %INC'
Exporter.pmCarp.pmstrict.pmwarnings.pm
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
disagree at this point and back away from
the keyboards... I've made my best arguments and I hate reruns. By now
everyone knows what we both think and they're probably sick of it to boot.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
is a bug.
Yes, MJD pointed it out last November in
http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/perl5-porters/2000-11/msg01107.html.
Simon Cozens submitted a patch which failed the test; I think I found the
problem with it and just submitted a revised patch to p5p.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 02:49 PM 2/17/01 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Sat, Feb 17, 2001 at 11:09:29AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> > >No, there will probably be a big push to shut it off, based on
> > >historical reactions to this sort of thing.
> >
> > Maybe I'm missing
At 12:12 PM 2/18/2001 +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
>On 17 Feb 2001 20:53:51 -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >Could
> >people please take the advocacy traffic elsewhere where it isn't noise?
>
>Advocacy is noise everywhere.
Not on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(http://lists.perl.org/showlist.cgi?name=advocacy)
.
Then you're looking in the wrong Camel. It's on page 502 in the first
printing of the third edition.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 05:27 PM 2/19/01 +, Piers Cawley wrote:
>Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I don't want to DWIM this. Would it be so bad to have to type
> >
> > GetOptions (foo => \my ($foo),
> > bar => \my $bar);
>
>If
te new RFCs that contradict older ones, or head off on
some tangent, but please let's not keep refining the old ones, enough is
enough.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
htened by the prospect of anyone programming with a
mindset that warnings are okay, and even more by the philosophy that we
should cater more to them than more careful people.
What if the warnings were:
1/100 chance of destroying your files at this point... you win!
1/100 chance of producing incorrect output at this point... you win!
1/100 chance of losing user data at this point... you win!
...
What if the warnings boiled down to that anyway?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 09:36 AM 2/22/2001 +, David Grove wrote:
>This is what's scaring me about all this talk about
>exceptions... it can break this mold and make Perl into a "complainer
>language" belching up uncaught (don't care) exceptions forcing try/except
>blocks around every piece of IO or DB handling. Th
6:32:16) [GCC egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux
(egcs- on $^O
Copyright 1991-1995 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
FNORD
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
At 03:18 PM 3/19/01 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>That's not really nuts. Really nuts would be suggesting that all operators
>should distribute:
>
> @a = ($foo, $bar) . $baz # @a = map { $_.$baz } ($foo, $baz)
>
>Mmmm. I could get to like that.
Seen http://dev.perl.o
At 10:50 AM 3/26/2001 -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "SC" == Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> SC> Why can't Perl automagically do a Schwartzian when it sees a
> SC> comparison with complicated operators or functions on each side of
> SC> it? That is, @s = sort { f($a) <=> f($
from blown minds after learning how fast
he wrote the thing.
Oh, and who put him up to that, eh?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
nt. I could argue that I don't see strictures as
'morality', and I think that's just an accidental consequence of the name;
suppose it had been called 'use salvation' instead? But there's no way to
win a values debate.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
y the time people learned to use '-6' we'd have Perl 7 out.
>
>I'm still trying to figure out why the flag needs to change. What's wrong
>with -e? It seems perfectly serviceable.
Because Larry said that by default Perl 6 would assume that its input was
in Perl
7; flag? At
>the very least, I want a short flag!
But by the time people learned to use '-6' we'd have Perl 7 out.
Whatever we come up with, let's figure out how to avoid having to change it
the next time we change Perl.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
closest mirror, of course.
>
>Would be interesting, but is probably bloatware...
It should by default use a local cache, of course. I suppose if you're
running it as root it should do a perl -MCPAN -e 'install HTML::Module'.
I seem to have misplaced my security hat...
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
not going to.
As a very low-tech solution, why not bundle perl 5 *with* perl 6 so that
once perl 6 detects that it's been fed perl 5 code, it can send it to the
perl 5 compiler/interpreter.
Yeah, I know it makes the resulting bundle huge, but at least it separates
the tasks of parsing perl5
At 02:33 PM 4/16/01 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 09:47 AM 4/16/2001 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>>As a very low-tech solution, why not bundle perl 5 *with* perl 6 so that
>>once perl 6 detects that it's been fed perl 5 code, it can send it to the
>>perl 5 compiler/i
At 09:06 PM 4/24/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Edward Peschko writes:
>: Ok, so what does:
>:
>: my %hash = ( 1 => 3);
>: my $hash = { 1 => 4};
>:
>: print $hash{1};
>:
>: print?
>
>4. You must say %hash{1} if you want the other.
I was teaching an intro class yesterday and as usual, there were
At 01:51 AM 5/6/01 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>The debate rages on: Is Perl Bactrian or Dromedary?
It's a Dromedary, it says so in the Colophon.
But maybe the symbol of Perl 6 should be a Bactrian, with the extra hump
symbolizing the increased power.
You knew this was coming...
> > AMD's "Duron". *shrug*
>
>"durian".
You want to name it after a fruit smelling of dead cows and sewer gas?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
frozen.
It's not what I'd call a positive image :-)
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
ent. (It also
>tends to pessimize linkage into pseudo-variadic languages like C.)
Um, how do you know for sure a subroutine isn't variadic? Even if it has a
fixed-length prototype, is Perl smart enough to know that it can't be
called as an object method, bypassing prototype
ed it was, Is
"Perl 6" the most appropriate title for what we discuss here and what brave
people like yourself will be implementing? If it's at all possible to
discuss that without devolving into tangential political debates, I'd like
to do so.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
o raise the question.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
At 09:20 AM 5/10/01 -0700, I wrote:
>At some point, the Perl 6 cognomen will have attracted enough inertia that
>we couldn't reasonably change it even if we wanted to. Maybe that time
>has already come. Maybe not. Can't hurt to raise the question.
I retract the last s
I am not attempting to make nearly so contentious a point (or
points). This may be better off in a separate thread.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
or 5 years. (I'm talking about rags like
Information Week, Internet Week, Computerworld, that sort of thing.) I'm
just applying the same principle here, comparing to the Perl 4 -> Perl 5
change.
Like I said, I figure it's a long shot; I just thought I'd run it up the
flagpole.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
d accept the other features it provides. I'd like to see
this in Perl 6.
I detest the pseudo-hash implementation (the part that's exposed to the
user, I mean).
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
At 12:45 PM 5/16/01 -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
>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.
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 which enable one to achieve greater levels of productivity and
performance i
, yet this usage might suggest to many people that they can be
changed at run time. If you see what I mean.
I'm sure I could get used to it, I'm just speaking to learnability.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
really outlying areas like New Zealand...
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
and I haven't
grokked that from the exegeses yet.
That's it. We now return you to the Clinton discussion ("it depends what
the meaning of 'is' is...")
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
At 01:31 PM 5/21/2001 +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
>> Um, this is a tiny little diversion here prompted by something that
>> came up on perl-beginners, of all places... it's not possible in
>> perl 5 to make a reference to an array or hash slice without doing
>> some copying.
>>
.
Of those, only subroutine refs and automatic method generation look like
must-haves for major projects, which are willing to surrender some of the
cute stuff in return for stability.
Quite how Foo prevents Bar from causing shenanigans if Bar was used first,
I don't know; might not be possible until runtime.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
At 02:39 PM 6/5/2001 -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
>Thank you, that's what I thought it might be. This can be done at compile
>time with a two-stage
>compilation. The first one writes the code that the second
>compiles. Then the checking can be
>done during the second stage.
Not when the
At 05:58 PM 6/10/2001 -0400, Sam Tregar wrote:
>SQL via DBI. It's got a terrible learning curve but it's still around for
>a reason. You learn all about SQL's strengths if you start trying to
>replace it with arrays and hashes. Go forth and learn!
He's right. I do a lot of DBI stuff with Orac
ill don't think there's anything to be gained here. As far as I can
tell, you're saying, "I want it to be easier to express relational database
operations." Me too. I just don't think they get any easier than they
already are.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
At 06:06 PM 6/10/2001 -0500, Me wrote:
>Dataset from multiple 'joined' tables
>
> (A pair of joined tables can be visualized as two
> spreadsheet like grids that intersect at right angles
> with the intersection point being the joined column.
> The vertical slice picks out rows whe
s" relationship,
>but that doesn't feel much better. Its just another
>way of programming round a weakness in the object
>models of most mainstream languages
>
>Can anyone see any problems with making C and
>C work with lists? C is not effected. We
>might want some magi
did, it might be really slow.
> > Somebody should write an implementation first, and then tackle efficiency.
>
>This is a joke, right? I'm on Candid Camera.
I think people are just surprised that you didn't call it Red::Herring.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
like that, so why is it cropping up that much in P6?
--
Peter Scott
empty array to die by default.
--
Peter Scott
http://www.perlmedic.com/
http://www.perldebugged.com/
l_2001.html
Or if you like:
http://www.yetanother.org/damian/Perl5+i/coroutines.html
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
closures, we
>can do this from wherever we like in the program.
So if you could serialize a continuation, you could freeze your program
state to disk and restore it later? Cool, makes for easy checkpoint/restarts.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com/
...
--
Peter Scott
ke of genius.
This conjured up an image of Larry whacking someone with
a coelacanth...
--
Peter Scott
http://www.perldebugged.com/
*** NEW *** http://www.perlmedic.com/
to get eurselves a Larry.
Just put Damian on it, and there'll be a Lingua::EU::ConstitutionGenerator
by Christmas. Probably with a back door making him king with droit du
seigneur option in perpetuity.
--
Peter Scott
http://www.perldebugged.com/
*** NEW *** http//www.perlmedic.com/
Raku libraries for Keras/Tensorflow, or AWS, or Kubernetes, leveraging the
novel features of Raku, could be killer apps for Raku. Ambitious, though.
Peter Scott
> On Dec 7, 2019, at 7:24 PM, Tom Blackwood wrote:
>
>
> Hello William,
>
> We are actually a small team maki
ollow the suggestions for
how to do that so you can see how they are received.
Peter Scott
w their skills while respecting the other members of the community.
--
Peter Scott
On 2/26/2020 11:14 AM, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
I used gnome calculator to 20 digits:
665857/470832
1.41421356237468991063
Sorry. Not seeing any repeating patterns.
Here is NAS doing it to 1 million digits (they have too
much time on their hands):
https://apod.nasa.gov/html
On 3/21/20 2:20 PM, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
On 2020-03-18 18:42, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
This is a long shot, but have any of you figured out
how to send eMail through G-Mail with OAuth2?
I have a module that uses cURL, but I can't figure
out how to get it to work with O
On 12/28/20 10:57 PM, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
On 12/28/20 4:54 AM, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
So please take what I say now as a plea for you to adapt a little,
not to get pissed off with us even though you do seem to have pissed
some of us off.
You have very definite ideas about w
On 12/28/20 11:49 PM, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
I will accept your target audience:
"Someone who already knows how to program and
uses 'Raku.'"
I will also accept that the documentation is not for me
or anyone else trying to learn Raku.
We explained that there are two t
lock at line 1
> my $q = Rat.new
0
> put $q
0
Peter Scott
On 7/19/2021 1:24 AM, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
If .new wouldn't initialize a type to its basic instantiation, what would be
the point of .new then?
FWIW, the same goes for:
dd Int.new; # 0
dd Num.new; # 0e0
dd Complex.new; # <0+0i>
dd Str.new; # ""
If you
be done by external code?
Best regards,
Vadim Belman
On Jul 19, 2021, at 1:00 PM, Peter Scott <mailto:pe...@psdt.com>> wrote:
On 7/19/2021 1:24 AM, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
If .new wouldn't initialize a type to its basic instantiation, what
would be the point of .new then?
yes, because then we could treat
>*all* instances of {...} as a block returning either a closure, a value
>for subscripting, or an anonymous hash, rather than having to decide at
>tokeniser time.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
http://www.perldebugged.com
At 05:43 PM 1/26/02 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 09:28:18AM -0800, Peter Scott wrote:
> > >%foo{"bar"}
>
>It's bare, and it's a word.
Maybe you want to come up with another term to describe it then... but it
isn't a &
bout how Perl 6 should
be easier to parse, and this issue is the poster child for the "Only perl
can parse Perl" camp. Does the price of easier parseability have to be
"oatmeal mixed with fingernail clippings"?
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
#x27;s a constant, but not if you're doing something like
printf "#.3f " x @nums, @nums;
and @nums is empty. You could always scan the format for a %-specifier
which was valid under the old rules and warn that they seem to be using
retro syntax.
# bespeaks a number-type of thi
t do
@left =~ @right
%left =~ %right
do? One can imagine useful default interpretations that are not commutative.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
and undef or empty list for loops that didn't
execute at all). Which means that some loops could execute and still be
false. Is this hopelessly retrograde thinking? Are the hordes of
programmers yet-to-be that will be weaned exclusively on Perl 6 look
scornfully on me for such opin
ting into the language something
which will get very little use, except that a few people will no doubt
enjoy it and insist they can't live without it?
I'm starting to wonder whether some features should be optional...
use extended qw(loop_syntax);
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
1 - 100 of 272 matches
Mail list logo
