Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have no objection to -internals remaining. I think their discussion
> will probably take off more after Larry's announcement.
Personally I'm betting that the volume we've seen on -language will
pale into tiny insignificance compared to the volume
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Readability is a programmer feature, not a language feature.
The most important optimization a programmer can make is to optimize
for understanding.
--
Piers
Robert Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Cozens wrote:
> > (defun Schwartzian (func list)
> > (mapcar
> >(lambda (x) (car x))
> >(sort
> > (mapcar
> > (lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
> > list
> > )
> > (lambda (x y) (< (cdr x) (cdr y)))
> > )
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Which is what I'm working on. You'll all be extremely pleased to know, I'm
> sure, that I have notes here for another 12 RFCs. After that, I have to start
> thinking.
Three days to go to the Big Freeze. Where are you going to find the
time?
--
Piers
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 03:49:10PM +0100, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> > Don't change "use less" to "use optimize". We don't
> > need to ruin the cuteness.
>
> "use less 'rolled_loops';" sounds really weird.
We obviously need to introduce a synonymous
C
Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2000, Richard Proctor wrote:
> > > Both \1 and $1 refer to what is matched by the first set of parens in a
> > > regex. AFAIK, the only difference between these two notation is that \1
> > > is used within the regex itself and $1 is used o
Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >I strongly agree with the opinion that we should try and get away from
> >special variables and switches in favor of functions and pragmas.
> >Witness 'use base' instead of '@ISA', 'use warnings', and so on.
>
> Huh? Why??? Perl's use of @ISA is
Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Class Collections: Provide the ability to overload classes
>
> =head1 VERSION
>
> Maintainer: Greg Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 17 Se
Alan Gutierrez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 27 Sep 2000, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
> > Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 27, 2000 at 03:49:10PM +0100, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> > > > Don't change "us
Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Elements of @_ should be read-only by default
>
> =head1 VERSION
>
> Maintainer: John Tobey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 28 Sep 2000
> Last
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Before I forget: (I read a *lot*)
> A Course In General Linguistics, F. de Saussure. tr. Roy Harris
> (If you don't know what relation this has to Perl, what are you doing
> here?)
>
> The Practice of Programming, Kernighan and Pike.
>
Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Nathan Torkington wrote:
> >
> > $als_keynote = Dumper($Larry->perl6_design);
>
>
>
>package Sympathy;
>sub create { print "We're behind you, $_!\n" }
>
>package main;
>create Sympathy because => RFCs for Larry;
>
>
> Heh, it ac
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >
> > But will there be a "meanuntil"?
>
> Not to mention "modewhile", "medianuntil", etc.
generouswhile, generousuntil...
--
Piers
Ariel Scolnicov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[ A bunch of stuff ]
Er, chaps, not wishing to tread on Skud's moderatorial toes and all,
but shouldn't all this be in perl6-internals?
Reply-To: set.
--
Piers
"Bradley M. Kuhn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I don't think we should dismiss it out of hand because people don't
> do a lot of systems programming C. some of the things we are going to build
> for C (if that's what we pick), are already there
Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 03:54 PM 12-06-2000 -0500, Sam Tregar wrote:
> >On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> > > Non-refcounting GC schemes are more expensive when they collect, but less
> > > expensive otherwise, and it apparently is a win for the non-refcount
> > >
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think I'd just as soon always call DESTROY in a predicable manner
> and not do *anything* perlish at GC time. If nothing else it means
> that we don't have to worry about having a valid perl context handy
> when the GC runs. (Since threading the thing i
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 01:20 PM 12/7/00 +, David Mitchell wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > print $foo[0];
> > > is
> > >foo->get_string[UTF_8](ARRAY, 0);
> > > while
> > >print $foo
> > > is
> > >foo->get_string[UTF_8](SCALAR);
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 05:55 PM 12/7/00 +0000, Piers Cawley wrote:
> >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I think I'd just as soon always call DESTROY in a predicable manner
> > > and not do *anything* perlish at GC
>"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes) writes:
>>>
>>> > $srt =~ tr/0-9a-z\xe9/a-jA-ZE/; # uc & sort nums after letters
&g
"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Marc Lehmann wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 05:31:29AM +, "David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > > I do not know exactly what the perl5 default sort heuristic is,
> > > aside that it tries to DWIM both numeric and string data.
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Marc Lehmann wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 05:31:29AM +, "David L. Nicol"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
&g
David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2001 at 09:28:26AM +0000, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
> > And for 'proper' library type sorting (assuming all works are in
> > English) we should really be doing something like:
> >
> >
Did we do this one already?
I have an embarrassingly large amount of code that has to do Cisa('Foo') }>, or Ccan('Bar') }> because there is a
chance that C<$foo> is an unblessed reference.
I would use UNIVERSAL::can directly, but I have some code (a
container/decorator class) that messes with is
Glenn Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> David Cantrell wrote:
>
> > And in any case, I can think of three different ways of saying 1821 in
> > English alone.
> >
> > One thousand eight hundred and twenty one
> > One thousand eight hundred twenty one
> > Eighteen hundred and twenty one
> >
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andreas J. Koenig) writes:
> > On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 16:37:23 -0500, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > from what I remember we discussed
> > an idea to allow people and organizations to produce their own list of
> > approved modules.
>
> This is already p
Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Larry mumbled something like "implements" and "interface". So to say
> > >
> > > package Net::FTP::Foo implements Net::FTP;
> > >
> > > But I don't think, anybody wrote an RFC about the plan.
> >
> > I did. Or something like it. And I've
"Branden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Of course, C++ has no GC, which is a good thing, but you can always
> fake it with Refcounts, which is much more efficient, and easily
> feasable with C++.
Err... current research shows that the refcount approach is one of the
slowest forms of GC, and it d
Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> > Since this thread is in the mood for quotes, here's one I'm fond of...
> > It goes something along the lines of:
> >
> > Any fool can create a complicated system.
> > The real skill is in making a simp
"Branden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
> >"Branden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Of course, C++ has no GC, which is a good thing, but you can always
> >> fake it with Refcounts, which is much more efficien
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 04:14:34PM -0800, Mark Koopman wrote:
> > > sub test {
> > > my($foo, $bar, %baz);
> > > ...
> > > return \%baz;
> > > }
> > are we considering to deprecate this type of bad style
>
> What bad style?
Well,
Mark Koopman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 12:06:12 -0500, Ken Fox wrote:
> >
> >
> > That may work for C, but not for Perl.
> >
> > sub test {
> > my($foo, $bar, %baz);
> > ...
> > return \%baz;
> > }
> >
> > You may notice that only PART
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 10:38 AM 2/12/2001 -0500, Sam Tregar wrote:
> >On Mon, 12 Feb 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >
> > > Perl needs some level of tracking for objects with finalization attached to
> > > them. Full refcounting isn't required, however.
> >
> >I think I've hea
Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 09:01 PM 2/15/01 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 11:08:47AM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > > However, that still doesn't get rid of the gotchas - personally I think that:
>
> > >
> > > my $a, $b, $c;
> > >
> > > should be
Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > Command-line flags on by default [-T -Mstrict -Mwarnings]:
> >
> > We already beat this to death with the .perlrc discussion. You'll
> > break reams of Perl code you probably don't even know you have this
> > way.
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> True enough. This is a small subset of general optimizations. For example,
> this:
>
>
>$i = 0;
>foreach (1..1000) {
> $i++;
>}
>
> can be easily optimized to:
>
>$i = 1000;
>
> and most language implementations with any sort of o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> English, by comparison shows the effects of protracted foreign
> occupation of English speaking peoples by conquerors who spoke a
> foreign language.
And also of protacted occupation of foreign countries by English
speaking conquerors. Witness the number of Indian loa
Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 04, 2001 at 11:46:12PM -0700, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> > Not a comment at all on it? Was I accidentally unsubscribed to
> > perl6-language?
> >
> > *tap* *tap* is this thing on?
> >
> > Nat
>
> Me, I've been racking my brain to fig
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 01:33:22PM -0700, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > > I'd really rather not, and I don't think that was Larry's intention. I
> > > think rather it was "perl 5 warning/strict levels", not "parse as perl 5
> > > code". At least I hope tha
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Of course all of this has been discussed. (See
>> http://archive.develooper.com/perl6-language-io%40perl.org/,
>> especially RFCs 100 and 14.)
>
> And is already available in a nearby parallel dimension:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 08:23 PM 4/13/2001 -0700, jc vazquez wrote:
> > > On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > We could then just add a -7 flag.
> > >
> > > Or, just use:
> > >
> > > #!/usr/bin/perl6
> > >
> >
> >To solve this versioning issue, is there
vaguely C-ish like that. And I think most Perl folks like the
> -> for class/object methods. It's a cute little arrow :) You'll have to
> make it very clear why . is a better fit for Perl 6 than -> Otherwise
> people will probably mourn the missing Mr. Pointy ;)
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
->method()).
>
> How about borrowing from Objective C?
>
>[$object method("foo", "bar")];
How do you create an anonymous list now then? Not that I object to
borrowing from Objective C you realise.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > On We
Those new properties thingies are looking powerful. Does this mean we
can now do:
sub decorate ($obj) {
$obj is ad_hoc_method(sub {...});
}
and expect C<$obj.ad_hoc_method(...)> to call the appropriate
subroutine?
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:59:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > Perl is a highly dynamic language
>
> An object with exactly one and only one method doesn't sound that
> dynamic to me.
Three methods, surely: next,
ssages.
They appear to rather like it in the UK. But then people are very
weird indeed.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
ind me how long ago it was that most of the systems you're
talking about actually started to include Perl as anything other than
a 'Danger Will Robinson, unsupported contrib code' type package?
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
s?
> >
> > No.
> >
>
> Why not?
You can always set a property on a function reference. But it seems a
little weird that functions can have properties in perl5, but not in
perl 6.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
methods and properties. I can see it causing problems due to
> them sharing namespaces. But I have not thought about it enough to
> say how much of a concern.
There's a part of me that sees this as a bonus.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
if ($retval = func(@args)) {
> > # it worked ...
>
> Right. Which of course can be done in Perl 5 with either "0 but
> true" (or "0E0") or if the value is an object, the use of
> overloading.
But what you can't do with 0E0 is the else branch of that example,
accessing C<$retval.what_went_wrong>, which would be really handy...
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
e like AA:
Which reminds me, must write up that proposal for YAPC::Europe...
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
ill use them to do strange and wonderful
> things as well.
>
> But then, we don't necessarily have to make the semantics particularly
> transparent for pathological cases, because people doing that are
> expected to know what they are doing.
Or pathological. I know which one I'm voting for...
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
olkit to
> output, execute and deparse Perl bytecode from Ruby source.
Now, if we can just translate Ruby's runtime libraries from C to Perl
we'll be laughing. Or laughed at. I'm never quite sure.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
nor issue of Leon not having ported all the runtime
libraries (in annoying C) yet.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 09:42:37PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Apart from the minor issue of Leon not having ported all the runtime
> > libraries (in annoying C) yet.
>
> Because I'm hacking at the bytecode l
gt; No, it does. Just as people have more accidents when talking on
> their cell phones while driving, even if the cell phone is mounted
> on the dashboard and their hands are free, the more you have
> distracting your attention, the more likely you are to make other
> mistakes. Human attention is the ultimate precious resource.
That's why we have automated testing. So that you don't have to waste
human attention looking for logic errors that may not be there. You
check stuff in and run the tests. If they pass, you didn't make any
basic logic errors so it's on to the next bit of coding.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
es in perl 5+i becomes
anything more than fiction then that eval will throw an exception.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 04:18:31PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 12:59:51PM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
> > > > Its not
Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 08:34:00AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > my $anon = My::Anon::ObjectFactory->new({base => 'Class',
> >
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 10:26:39AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Hmm... let me write it first would you? Shouldn't be *too* hard.
> > Suggestions for a real name for it?
>
> Class::Anonymous? Class::Anon?
>
> PS base has to take an
7;ClassName',
method1 => sub {...},
method2 => sub {...},);
Comes in very handy in Unit::Test, especially when you're writing
tests to test the test harness...
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
}
> print foo()->();
Well, I would expect it to output 'foo' on both occasions, and I'm
more than a little surprised to discover that it doesn't. Looks like a
bug to me.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
rguments passed in, it's still going to be possible to
rebless an argument, therefore $spot will need to be rechecked after
every method call to which it is passed as an argument.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
of OO values is made.
You missed
my Critter $spot = AnimalShelter.choose_critter;
I'm sure you were/are aware of the possibility of factory objects etc,
but I think it's best to mention them explicitly just in case they get
overlooked...
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
e:
sub foo {
my $self = shift;
my $method = $self->{'_foo'} || $self->can('_foo');
$self->$method(@_);
}
used. But I take your general point about 'goto &$method'.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
the 'call_this_function' vtable method to DTRT, which, unless
it's a 'multi' function, will simply do what function calls have
always done. You only have to do the more complex stuff if the
function object is a 'multi' function, in which case it'll have a
different handler in the vtable.
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
ir parameters passed in as a list in PMC register 0,
> * unless we can unambiguously figure out their prototype at
> * compilation time
Will the subroutine know how it was called? (ie: Through method
dispatch or through straightforward symbol table lookup. I'm really
hoping the answer to this is 'yes'.) Or will methods and subroutines
be distinct now?
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 10:32 AM 9/4/2001 +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > > * Methods get their parameters passed in as a list in PMC register 0,
> > > * unless we can unambiguously figure out their prototype at
> > > * compilation time
&g
fairly serious retooling of
the call stack if they are to work properly. And one shot continuations are the
next best thing to useless.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
nt <<'EOQ'
I like witty sayings as much as the next guy, but wit can hurt when
misdirected. If people want me to be machine for cranking out quote
file fodder, I'll do my best. But I also care about my friends.
Larry
EOQ
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
;t be surprised :)
>
> Algebra, in general, is a specific form of calculus. So, we're
> speaking of the same thing, just in different terms.
Umm... I think you have that relationship the wrong way around.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
tainly make it easier for this summary writer if they appeared
in the same inbox as the rest of p6c.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
list should only flatten
array arguments if there is only one array. And if it doesn't, how do
I declare parameter that is 'a slurpy list of arrays' or 'the rest
of the arguments, without flattening'. If I *really* want aggressive
flattening then I can call, say, @slurpy_param.flatten
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
s
(and other tricksy class methods) to be found in the Ruby on Rails
framework...
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
quoting mechanism that returns a parse
tree rather than a simple string if we want to deal with interpolating
complex values (especially if we don't want to have to worry about
what, if any, quotes are needed round some of our interpolated values.
--
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.bofh.org.uk/
Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 10:38:39AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
>> On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
>> > rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
>>
>> No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
>> rules" for that type
Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 06:51:19AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
>> I have no doubt that, once Perl 6 is available, we'll see a rash of
>> modules released in the Grammar:: namespace. Including
>> Grammar::HTML and Grammar::XML.
>
> I have no doubt that, o
Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DS> We'll find out with A6 whether we do coroutines and continuations as
> DS> part of the core perl. If not, well, python does the first and ruby
> DS> the second, so it's all good in there
=head1 This week on Perl 6 (17-23 June 2002)
by Piers Cawley, 020020624
=head2 Notes
It's been a while since the last Perl 6 digest and summarizing
everything that's happened since then would take, ooh, a while. So
I've punted on that, and just pretended that the last one was
Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "SC" == Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> SC> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damian Conway) writes:
> >> > hashes can now take objects as keys and won't just stringify them.
> >>
> >> Correct. But I believe that's only if the hash has a prope
David Whipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Maybe we should just say 'sod it' and implement the entire Smalltalk
>> Collection hierarchy and have done with it? Sets, bags, hashes
>> (dictionaries for the Smalltalker), whatever, all have
This came up in a discussion on London.pm about Damian's Perl 6 talk,
which led us to wonder about control exceptions and how they're
handled. At the moment, control exceptions fall into the 'vaguely
handwavy' category, and what follows is my attempt to work out how I
think they should behave...
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Uri Guttman wrote:
>
>> but what simon was saying (and i agree) is the the pair IS a single
>> item. it becomes the key and its value is 'scalars'.
>
> No. If it's a PAIR, then its key is the key and its value is the value.
>
>
>> hashes can now take ob
xing", pairs => "and", "scalars");
It turns out that the @kv_array case will Just Work, and the last case
will cause discussion to break out. Damian thought that the example
above would throw an error because there are 5 elements in the list.
Juergen Boemmels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
f> Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> At 1:58 PM + 9/5/02, "Jürgen" "Bömmels" (via RT) wrote:
>> >The recent discussion of languages independence rememberd me of an
>> >very old patch of mine which implements scheme pairs. (January 2002)
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:46:24PM -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
>> What is really needed is something that converts the date syntax
>> to normal Perl code:
>>
>>rule iso_date { () -
>>() -
>>()
>>
Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 02:20:10PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 10:46:24PM -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
>> >> What is really n
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>> Juergen Boemmels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > But how do I represent them at parrot-level.
>>
>> { type => '*environment*' value => {scratchpad => aScratchPadPMC}
Juergen Boemmels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> [...]
>
>> >> Cool, applied. How far from "real" scheme are we?
>> >
>> > I think its quite far.
>> > The first thing is symbo
Lists for languages/scheme
Jügen Bömmels offered a patch implementing Scheme pairs, using simple
Arrays. Dan was impressed, and wondered how far we were from 'real'
scheme. Jürgen thinks we're quite some way away; we still need symbols,
strings, lexicals, functions, macro
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>>
>> >> Juergen Boemmels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> > But how do I represent them at parrot-level.
>>
>> Thanks for that John. I always relish being patronize
Juergen Boemmels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>> typeof is a *really* bad idea. Let the 'Object' PMC handle the
>> multilevel vtable look up (in exactly the same way that one does
>> lexical lookup in the e
So, the new rule for blocks and when the need semicolons seems to be
"You don't need a semicolon if the block is the last argument of a
subroutine which expects a block as its last argument", which is all
very well and all, but where does that leave:
sub foo ( &block ) {...}
...
$wibb
Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This is for everyone: <
>In Perl, this problem comes up most often when people say "Why do I
>have to put a semicolon after do {} or eval {} when it looks like a
>complete statement?"
>
>Well, in Perl 6, you don't, if the final c
So, do we have a timetable for when the Perl 6 interpreter is going
handle closures?
Also, consider the following:
sub fac($n) {
when 0 { 1 }
default { $n * fac($n - 1) }
}
print1 fac(10);
Compiling this barfs because there's 'no topic in fac', despite the
apocalypse stating tha
So, I know that recursion doesn't seem to work in the simple case, but
at least it reaches runtime. Mutual recursion doesn't even compile
successfully.
Here's the classic example of mutual recursion:
sub even ($n) {
given $n {
when 0 { return 1 };
default { odd($n-1) };
}
"Sean O'Rourke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> So, I know that recursion doesn't seem to work in the simple case, but
>> at least it reaches runtime. Mutual recursion doesn't even compile
>>
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 2002-09-12 at 06:46, Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> Here's the classic example of mutual recursion:
>>
>> sub even ($n) {
>> given $n {
>> when 0 { return 1 };
>> defaul
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've decided it's time for me to take another break from this list.
> Not that any of you care, but I think the reason is important.
>
> Due to a silly misunderstanding -- one which could have been easily
> avoided by a simple request for clarification --
1 - 100 of 766 matches
Mail list logo
