Excuse my ignorance of the finer points, but I thought the reason for
bless's continued existence was so that the same sort of brilliant OO
experimentation that Damian and others have done with pure Perl 5 can
continue to be done in pure Perl 6 without having to hack p6opaque?
Trey
In a message dated Mon, 17 Apr 2006, Sean Sieger writes:
from
There are no C or C modifiers (changes to the meta-characters
replace them - see below).
to
There are no C or C modifiers (change to the meta-characters
that replace them - see below).
I don't think so There are no meta-char
In a message dated Sun, 30 Apr 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The whitespace in the middle may include any of the comment forms above.
-Because comments always count as whitespace, the dots in
+Because comments always count as whitespace, the C<\.> in
-$object.#{ foo }.say
+$object\#{ f
In a message dated Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
But would it be reasonable to also provide a named-only parameter to
each for that purpose?
our List multi Container::each(Bool :$stop, Container [EMAIL PROTECTED])
So that:
for each(:stop, =<>; 1..*) -> ($line, $lineno) {
say "$line
In a message dated Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
On Tue, 2006-07-11 at 09:53 -0700, Trey Harris wrote:
It sounds reasonable to me, but :stop reads badly. Maybe C<:strictly>?
Maybe it's not a function of a flag to each, but a marking that certain
lists should be
In a message dated Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Ruud H.G. van Tol writes:
Larry Wall schreef:
Maybe we should just make statement modifiers
uppercase and burn out everyone's eye sockets. :)
Or maybe
{
}.
while $x ;
Actually, can't that be made to work already (already by the language
spec, not
In a message dated Mon, 7 Aug 2006, Daniel Hulme writes:
Sorry to patch the patch, but in
-Other sigils binds only to the I argument with that name:
+Other sigil binds only to the I argument with that name:
the replacement makes no more sense than the original. "Other sigils
bind" or "Any othe
In a message dated Mon, 21 Aug 2006, Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
But, assuming for the moment that C autoloads C,
does that mean that
class Dog is Mammal-4.5
is valid?
Yes, it must be valid. See
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S11.html#Versioning :
So you can just say
m
Oops, Luke Palmer alerted me to the fact that I screwed up in the below.
In a message dated Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Trey Harris writes:
My question is, if a program is running where two versions of Dog are loaded,
say 1.3.4 and 2.1, and a file contains:
use Dog-1.3.4-cpan:JRANDOM;
class Poodle
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Daniel Hulme writes:
If "changing that functionality beyond recognition" means changing its
external behavior (as opposed to its internal behavior) so that it
acts differently from what the superclass had promised to do, then
no, it's not any weirder--but I
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Juerd writes:
Trey Harris skribis 2006-08-25 13:26 (-0700):
Explain to me how "nontraditional" DBC might work in an internally
consistent way. Otherwise, this is hand-waving. :-)
Perl *is* hand-waving.
Yeah, but hand-waving on how it m
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Mark J. Reed writes:
I think the justification for Luke's POV is the number of operations
each class provides. But my perspective agrees with Juerd -
subclasses can remove functionality as well as adding it, and I
definitely view "constant" as an add-on modi
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, jerry gay writes:
perhaps trey meant "subclasses can add constraints as well as
functionality" instead of "subclasses can remove functionality as well
as adding it."
just a guess.
~jerry
Ok... same thing from a DBC perspective. Subclasses can add functiona
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Mark J. Reed writes:
On 8/25/06, Trey Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> subclasses can remove functionality as well as adding it
Can someone suggest some reading I can do to understand how that works?
I can't wrap my head around the idea
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Mark J. Reed writes:
OK, I admit I wasn't thinking about things from a DBC perspective, and
misunderstood "DBC" to be a reference to some database module. I here
am new and I didn't have context. My bad.
But if we're talking design-by-contract, I don't see
In a message dated Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Juerd writes:
Trey Harris skribis 2006-08-25 11:33 (-0700):
Ok... same thing from a DBC perspective. Subclasses can add functionality
(by AND'ing postconditions), or remove constraints (by OR'ing
preconditions), but they can't tradi
In a message dated Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Mark Stosberg writes:
Regarding The S06 description of named arguments:
http://feather.perl6.nl/syn/S06.html#Named_arguments
What I find missing here is documentation of the signature to use
if you want to declare "I accept an arbitrary number of named
argu
In a message dated Tue, 29 Aug 2006, Mark Stosberg writes:
my $rm = sub { given $rm_param {
when Code { $rm_param(self) }
when Hash { %rm_param }
default{ self.query.param($rm_param) }
}}();
This is eerily like Contextual::Return, which made me wonder if it's eve
In a message dated Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Juerd writes:
Hm. I don't know how "but" works exactly, but in the realm of syntactic
sugar, this is appealing:
$foo but s/foo/bar/
I like it.
This should be easy to make work in theory, but for the problem with
C's semantics which I'll get to in a mom
In a message dated Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Juerd writes:
Trey Harris skribis 2006-09-01 0:17 (-0700):
I think these semantics are Almost Right, but yet Entirely Wrong. The
problem is that C reads to me as a *mutating* operator. That is, I
would expect the above code snippet to give me a C<$z.y&
In a message dated Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Paul Seamons writes:
I'm not sure if I have seen this requested or discussed.
This was definitively rejected by Larry in 2002:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/9343
He has not revisited the issue in the several times it has come up since.
In a message dated Fri, 1 Sep 2006, jerry gay writes:
On 9/1/06, Trey Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In a message dated Fri, 1 Sep 2006, Paul Seamons writes:
> I'm not sure if I have seen this requested or discussed.
This was definitively rejected by Larry
This has been driving me mad, and an hour of hacking at cperl-mode.el has
only convinced me that I don't know elisp well enough to solve the
problem
Variables with twigils whose name matches something else are getting
recognized incorrectly. For example, $.x is getting interpreted as $.
In a message dated Mon, 4 Sep 2006, Steffen Schwigon writes:
First you could try an older revision, I recommend r7845 or r10822 of
pugs repository.
No, neither of those work. To see what I'm talking about, just create a
file containing:
use v6-alpha;
class Point {
has $.x;
has $.y;
In a message dated Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Ph. Marek writes:
I now had a look at http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S06.html
but didn't find what I meant. Sorry if I'm just dumb and don't
understand you (or S06); I'll try to explain what I mean.
I don't think you're dumb; the Synopses just requ
markstos++ pointed out the following behavior:
use v6-alpha;
{
when 1 ~~ 0 {
say "Surprise!"
}
}
This code prints "Surprise!", because $_ is undef, which is false, just
like 1 ~~ 0 is.
I'd like to make the following suggestions for Synopsis clarification:
1. It will be a
In a message dated Thu, 7 Sep 2006, Mark Stosberg writes:
To refine this point a bit, the spec is clear that 'when' is useful not
just with 'given' but with "any block that sets $_".
Thanks, I was not being terribly precice when I conflated when with given.
Of course, CATCH is another case whe
In a message dated Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Mark Stosberg writes:
I do share your sentiment that CGI.pm shouldn't be a clone of how P5
works. I'd like the HTML building methods to stay out, which wasn't even
one of the differences you cared about yourself.
I agree with the sentiment, but as a practical
In a message dated Sat, 9 Sep 2006, Mark Stosberg writes:
I do share your sentiment that CGI.pm shouldn't be a clone of how P5
works. I'd like the HTML building methods to stay out, which wasn't even
one of the differences you cared about yourself.
I agree with the sentiment, but as a practical
In a message dated Mon, 11 Sep 2006, Richard Hainsworth writes:
I am trying to find out how to use (in perl6) perl5 modules that contain
subroutines.
Imports from Perl 5 modules don't currently work.
You can workaround this using .can, see below.
use perl5:Time::gmtime;
my $gm = gmtime();
p
In a message dated Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Darren Duncan writes:
Putting aside legacy issues for the moment,
I suggest that it might be appropriate to rename the .grep list operator to
.where, so we can say, for example:
@filtered = @originals.where:{ .foo eq $bar };
Note that this can be writt
In a message dated Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Markus Laire writes:
On 9/19/06, Trey Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In a message dated Mon, 18 Sep 2006, Darren Duncan writes:
> @filtered = @originals.where:{ .foo eq $bar };
Note that this can be written:
@filtered = any(@originals)
From S06:
sub bar ($a,$b,$c,:$mice) { say $mice }
sub foo (\$args) { say $args.perl; &bar.call($args); }
The C<.call> method of C objects accepts a single C
object, and calls it without introducing a C frame.
And from S12:
In addition to C, the special function C dispatches
In a message dated Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Larry Wall writes:
The obvious ASCII for ¢ would be c/ or C/ or c| or c| or maybe just |.
I like ¢,but:
c/$foo # ASCII of ¢$foo
d/$foo # d() divided by $foo
is rather confusing. (Same goes for |).
So the Term Term exclusion makes me rather lean tow
Oops, I hate typos that result in my writing exactly the opposite of what
I meant:
In a message dated Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Trey Harris writes:
In a message dated Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Larry Wall writes:
The obvious ASCII for ¢ would be c/ or C/ or c| or c| or maybe just |.
I like ¢,but:
c/$foo
In a message dated Wed, 27 Sep 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
Any thoughts?
I'm still thinking about the practical implications of this... but what
immediately occurs to me:
The point of multiple, as opposed to single, dispatch (well, one of the
points, and the only point that matters when we'
In a message dated Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
Aaron Sherman wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Actually, it's a promise made by a package (not a class) to meet the
> specification given by a role (which can, and in this case probably
> does, reside in a separate fil
In a message dated Thu, 28 Sep 2006, Jonathan Lang writes:
while roles can be abstract, classes and packages should not be.
Really? I think I need to let that sink in and percolate a bit.
I'm rather fond of creating abstract superclasses to factor out common
object-management code. I have m
In a message dated Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
First the high-level point: I'm dropping the RFC, because, as TimToady
pointed out on IRC, we're not quite far enough down the line to see the
breadth or certainty of the need yet.
Yes, but I don't think the conversation should stop.
In a message dated Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
Trey Harris wrote:
In a message dated Fri, 29 Sep 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
[snip]
However, that's not to say that a class can't be abstract, just that a
class that does an interface (a role with nothing but abstract meth
In a message dated Wed, 4 Oct 2006, chromatic writes:
The assumption I remember from the design meetings was always "No library
designer has the knowledge or the right to tell me how fast or strict my
program has to run." Whatever B&D you do in the privacy of your own modules
is fine, but if it
In a message dated Wed, 4 Oct 2006, jesse writes:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:01:22PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
The point is that the person writing the program decides which handcuffs or
costumes all of the code has to wear, not the person writing the libraries.
If you want to set a policy for you
In a message dated Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Jonathan Lang writes:
In Perl 6, the abstract SystemMonitor could be a role, and a concrete
ScriptedMonitor could be a class that does SystemMonitor, but it's not at
all clear to me what HardwareMonitor would be, since classes can't be
abstract and roles can't
In a message dated Wed, 4 Oct 2006, Smylers writes:
Trey Harris writes:
I remember not so many years ago when there were a lot of modules
floating around that required you to do "no strict" of various flavors
in order to use them.
Really? How?
I wrote imprecisely. Not to &qu
In a message dated Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Jonathan Lang writes:
Since Baz does both Foo and Bar, you cannot use type-checking to
resolve this dilemma.
Why not? Why shouldn't this work:
my Foo $obj1 = getBaz(); # object is a Baz
$obj1.baz(); # Foo::baz is called
my Bar $obj2 =
In a message dated Wed, 25 Oct 2006, TSa writes:
from the recent threads 'class interface of roles', 'set operations for
roles' and 'signature subtyping and role merging' I wonder how typish
roles actually are. Some seem to consider roles as lightweight particles
that serve to compose classes.
In a message dated Sat, 28 Oct 2006, chromatic writes:
When you specify a type to constrain some operation, you specify that
the target entity must perform that role.
That statement is very concise and direct. If the fuzziness I observed
about the identity of the basic building block of type w
In a message dated Sat, 28 Oct 2006, Trey Harris writes:
In a message dated Sat, 28 Oct 2006, chromatic writes:
When you specify a type to constrain some operation, you specify that the
target entity must perform that role.
That statement is very concise and direct. If the fuzziness I
In a message dated Fri, 7 Jun 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> The most serious objection to this was 'well, use modules for matching *ml" -
> which simply points out that the current incarnation of perl6 regex doesn'
> t handle a very large class of matching problems very well.
I don't think th
In a message dated Sun, 9 Jun 2002, Damian Conway writes:
> Trey Harris wrote:
> > rule parsetag :w {
> > $tagname :=
> > %attrs := [ () =
> > ()
> > ]*
> >/?
> >
> > }
On seco
In a message dated Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Michael G Schwern writes:
> Attributes
> Transcending mere objects and classes, Perl 6 introduces adverbs.
Attributes are adjectives, not adverbs. Aren't they?
Trey
Did I hear somewhere that paragraph mode (i.e., C<$/ = ''>) is going away?
I can't find it in my archives, so maybe it was one of my feverish Perl 6
dreams (of which I've had too many lately, after spending a few days in
training with Damian ;-) but I think I heard it said by someone with
authorit
In a message dated Sat, 6 Jul 2002, Sean O'Rourke writes:
> - Implicit currying variables ($^a etc) are in. I thought I had read
> somewhere they were gone in favor of closure args, but people seem
> to be using them, and they're not hard to put in.
My understanding is that they still exist
In a message dated Mon, 15 Jul 2002, Brent Dax writes:
> With explicit, you just get the result of Inf ** 2 (which presumably is
> still Inf) in $bar. Perhaps neither is what you want, but at least it
> doesn't take forever to run.
Yes. This is my fear of hyperoperation being the default for no
In a message dated Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Miko O'Sullivan writes:
> OK, would that notation ( @arr[] = $var ) be something that could be added
> by a module, in the same way that operators and /* */ will be addable?
I don't think we've seen too much about how Larry plans to do
Perl-munging-Perl except
In a message dated Fri, 9 Aug 2002, Adam Lopresto writes:
> I was wondering whether the Perl 'while (<>){' idiom will continue to be
> supported in Perl 6? I seem to recall people posting example code the list
> using it (although I can't dig any up), but it seems to me that if Perl 6's
> lazy l
Another one...
class Foo is Bar;
method a {
setup();
}
1;
# EOF
(Is the 1 still required? I think I heard Damian say it was going away.)
The question is, is this valid, if Bar defines a sub/static method
'setup'?
Is my instict right that 'sub' in a class is a 'class/static method' in
the
In a message dated Sat, 17 Aug 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> [$!] Typically contains an object with both string and integer
> conversions. Whether convertability to both types is enough to satisfy a
> superpositional type is an interesting question. I suspect it *is*.
Then I'd assume that mul
I'm wondering about how the sigil-invariance rule interacts with
attributes.
class Foo {
attr $bar;
attr @bar;
method baz {
return @.bar[$.bar]; # sigils disambiguate
}
method frob ($self:) {
return $self.bar[$self.bar]; # uh-oh
}
}
Is this
In a message dated Tue, 27 Aug 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
> No, it's right. But it doesn't break that. In the grammar, C-like
> languages include (something like):
>
> statement: expression ';'
> statement: if expression block
>
> So an if _statement_ terminates itself. The } on a line
In a message dated 27 Aug 2002, Uri Guttman writes:
> m{^\s* $stuff := [ "(.*?)" | (\S+) ] };
Or, how about
my ($fields) = /( '"')>|\S+)/;
? :-)
Trey
In a message dated 27 Aug 2002, Uri Guttman writes:
> > "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> LW> On 27 Aug 2002, Uri Guttman wrote: : and quoteline might even
> LW> default to " for its delim which would make : that line:
> LW> :
> LW> : my ($fields) = /(|\S+)/;
>
> LW
In a message dated 28 Aug 2002, Aaron Sherman writes:
> Ok, just to be certain:
>
> $_ = "0";
> my $zilch = /0/ || 1;
>
> Is $zilch C<"0"> or 8?
8? How do you get 8? You'd get a result object which stringified was "0"
and booleanfied was true. So here, you'd get a result object vag
In a message dated Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Janek Schleicher writes:
> Aaron Sherman wrote at Wed, 28 Aug 2002 00:34:15 +0200:
>
> > $stuff = (defined($1)?$1:$2) if /^\s*(?:"(.*?)"|(\S+))/;
>
> It gives me the idea of a missing feature:
>
> What really should be expressed is:
>
> my ($stuff) = /^\s*
In a message dated Thu, 29 Aug 2002, Damian Conway writes:
> And, of course, the C property would smart-match its value
> against the corrresponding argument, so one could also code optimized
> variants like:
>
> sub repeat is multi ($desc is valued(1), &body) {
> body(1);
>
In a message dated 1 Sep 2002, Uri Guttman writes:
> > "DW" == David Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> DW> On Sunday, September 1, 2002, at 05:30 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> >> Sure. But the right solution is to permanently eliminate the
> >> sesquipedalian
> >> name (so you don
In a message dated 2 Sep 2002, Aaron Sherman writes:
> I'm working on a library of rules and subroutines for dealing with UNIX
> system files. This is really just a mental exercise to help me grasp the
> new pattern stuff from A5.
>
> I've hit a snag, though, on hypothetical variables. How would
In a message dated Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Garrett Goebel writes:
> Don't the following statements have identical meaning?
>
> my Date $date;
> my Date $date = Date->new();
Not at all. The first declares that $date is a variable containing Date
objects, the second does the same, plus instantiates a ne
In a message dated Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Trey Harris writes:
> > So what again is wrong with:
> >
> > my Date $date = 'June 25, 2002';
>
> Nothing--if Date is tieable and implements a STORE method which
> instantiates a new object.
Well, now that I re-read my
In a message dated Tue, 3 Sep 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 03:44 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
>
> >> my Date $date .= new('Jun 25, 20002');
> >
> > H. That's a very interesting idea.
> > I like it.
>
> Looks pretty groovy to me too. It looks like the .=
> o
In a message dated Tue, 3 Sep 2002, Buddha Buck writes:
> I suspect that, if it makes sense to say
>
> $foo = &$date.method;
>
> then it would also make sense to say
>
> $date .= $foo;
>
> as well.
Interesting, that first line
$foo = &$date.method;
I need a bit of a refresher here, as my searc
In a message dated Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
> The thread on hypotheticals has caused me to reread that section of A5 a
> few times now and a couple of paragraphs bother me the more I read
> them. I'll just quote the parts that bother me:
>
> ... If a regex sets a hypo
In a message dated Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Andrew Wilson writes:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 03:48:41PM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 04:43:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > Only augment //= in subroutine declarations, //= would also work.
> > > I love the //= oper
In a message dated Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
> Why would bitwise have anything but integer signatures. What does
> 4.56 | 2.81 mean? Also, should perl lossily convert real to int, or give
> an error if it can't?
Seems to me that that's a decision that has to be made for each function
(Sorry for responding to my own post, and on a tangential point at that,
but...)
In a message dated Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Trey Harris writes:
> In a message dated Thu, 5 Sep 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
> > Why would bitwise have anything but integer signatures. What does
> > 4.56 | 2.
In a message dated Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Steve Canfield writes:
> Would it be accurate to say that "is" sets properties of variables, whereas
> "but" sets properties of values? If so, what would this output:
>
> my $var is true;
> $var=0;
> if ($var) {print "true"}
> else {print "false"}
>
> I
I think this discussion has gotten out of hand, and I hope that Larry,
Damian or Allison will grace us with a resolution soon. :-)
May I suggest that we start with some DWIMmy examples and try to arrive at
a mechanism that will make them all DWIM? Here are my opinions, feel free
to shoot them do
In a message dated Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
> Y'all have it backwards.
>
> [1,*[2,[3,4,5]],6] # [1,2,[3,4,5],6]
> [1,*[2,*[3,4,5]],6] # [1,2,3,4,5,6]
>
> Flat flattens outwards, not inwards.
Ah. *slaps head* of course. That makes much more sense
Replying to myself to clear a few things up...
In a message dated Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Trey Harris writes:
> 2. Scalar assignment.
>
> my $a;# 1.
> $a = X;
>
> my $a;# 2.
> $a = X;
>
> my $a;# 3.
> ($a) = X;
>
>
In a message dated 24 Sep 2002, Aaron Sherman writes:
> Grrr... I want that to work, really I do, but since, as Larry has
> pointed out, there's no functional difference between an array ref and
> an array in Perl 6, they would be the same. This is because push is
> almost certainly defined as:
>
In a message dated 24 Sep 2002, Aaron Sherman writes:
> This is because push is
> almost certainly defined as:
>
> sub push(@target, *@list) { ... }
That should be
sub push(@target is rw, *@list);
but otherwise I think that's right.
Now, implementation in Perl 6 (though I assume it's
In a message dated Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Chip Salzenberg writes:
> According to Trey Harris:
> > According to Larry,
> > $a = (1,2,3);
> > is equivalent to
> > $a = [1,2,3];
> > because they're both equivalent to
> > $a = scalar(1,2,3)
>
> But
In a message dated 24 Sep 2002, Aaron Sherman writes:
> That doesn't really work. Because now you introduce the case where:
>
> $x = (1,2,3);
> @y = (1,2,3);
> $z = [1,2,3];
> push @a, $x, @y, $z, (1,2,3), [1,2,3];
>
> Behaves in ways that will take hours to explain to newb
In a message dated Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Jonathan Scott Duff writes:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2002 at 11:14:04AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> > Again, we're wading into the waters of over-simplification. Let's try:
> >
> > sub foo1(){ my @foo=(1,2,3); return @foo; }
> > sub foo2(){ my $foo
In a message dated Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Mike Lambert writes:
> Consider:
> $a = (1);
> and
> ($a) = (1);
Yes? They both do the same thing--set $a to 1. It looks like the bottom
one is a list assigned to a list, but that might be optimized out, as it
doesn't matter.
> > 5. Assignment to arrays an
In a message dated Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Michael G Schwern writes:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 06:04:28PM -0700, David Whipp wrote:
> > On a slightly different note, if we have interfaces then I'd really
> > like to follow the Eiffel model: features such as renaming methods
> > in the derived class may
In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, John Williams writes:
> On Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Trey Harris wrote:
>
> > Incidentally, has there been any headway made on how you DO access
> > multiple classes with the same name, since Larry has (indirectly) promised
> > us that? I.
In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro writes:
> On Thursday, October 3, 2002, at 04:25 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > Class::Delegation?
>
> Yeah, it's one of the best I've seen: it makes sense, does everything I
> want, and is easy to explain even to newbies. The perl5 hash-bas
In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Allison Randal writes:
> However they're defined, they will be clearly marked internally as
> properties, so there's little risk of confusing property attachment with
> inheritance.
except that they seem to share a single namespace, since both
user-defined
In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Michael G Schwern writes:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 03:59:08PM -0400, Mike Lambert wrote:
> > With pre/post conditions, a subclass is allowed to weaken the
> > preconditions or strengthen the postconditions.
>
> How exactly does one "weaken" a precondition?
Yo
In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Allison Randal writes:
> So far, classes are uppercase and properties are lowercase, but that's
> convention, not law.
Do runtime (value) properties and compile-time (variable) properties share
the same namespace?
That is, to go back to an earlier discussion,
In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Garrett Goebel writes:
> Michael G Schwern:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002 at 05:30:49PM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
> > > In a message dated Thu, 3 Oct 2002, Michael G Schwern writes:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Oct 03, 2002
In a message dated Fri, 4 Oct 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 09:13:45AM -0400, Chris Dutton wrote:
> > > How exactly does one "weaken" a precondition?
> >
> > At least in Eiffel, if you redefine a method, you may not give it
> > stringer preconditions than the original
In a message dated Fri, 4 Oct 2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 06:26:31PM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
> > > But what does it mean to be "stronger"? How does Eiffel figure out if
> > > a given precondition is "stronger" or "we
In a message dated Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Allison Randal writes:
> More useful: keep a site-wide or company-wide file of version aliases to
> make sure everyone uses the same version, and to make upgrades to the
> next version as simple as editing a single file.
Ah, but the usual case is this:
You dow
In a message dated Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Noah White writes:
>
> On Sunday, October 6, 2002, at 01:50 AM, Brent Dax wrote:
>
> > Parens don't construct lists EVER! They only group elements
> > syntactically. One common use of parens is to surround a
> > comma-separated list, but the *commas* are cre
In a message dated Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Allison Randal writes:
> Hmmm... I can see how it might be handy if C would just
> grab the highest numbered "Acme::N..." module on the system.
After a
no strict 'versions';
please. :-)
Trey
In a message dated Tue, 8 Oct 2002, Michael G Schwern writes:
> On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 06:17:37PM -0400, Daniel B. Boorstein wrote:
> > I think there may be some confusion here. In java, there's no special syntax
> > to declare a method an optional part of the interface. All concrete classes
> >
In a message dated Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Larry Wall writes:
> If only we had Unicode editors, we could just force everyone to use
> the infinity symbol where they mean it. It seems a shame to make a
> special case of the .. operator. Maybe we should ... to mean "and so
> on forever":
>
> @a[0...;
In a message dated Wed, 9 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro writes:
>
> Uh-oh: my life is gonna suck. I've spent days hunting obscure bugs
> that were caused by a single mistyped character. Now I'll be spending
> days hunting obscure bugs that were caused by a single *pixel*.
>
I've already been the
1 - 100 of 226 matches
Mail list logo
