Re: require < 6.x

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:05:19PM -0500, Stephen P. Potter wrote: > Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "NeonEdge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whisper > ed: > | This is probably way too late, but does this make any sense: could p6 allow > | (for the first few versions anyway) a "require <6;" directive

Re: PDD for code comments ????

Based on the silence == assent prinicple, I think we have agreed: 1. we need "a relatively strict and standard way" to document code. 2. This is the time and place to discuss it. 3. The result of the discusssion should be a PDD. 4. Most commentary should appear within the src file itself, or it's

RE: require < 6.x

On Wed, Feb 21, 2001 at 02:05:19PM -0500, Stephen P. Potter wrote: > If they're going to have to go in and add a "require <6" already, its easier > to just modify the #! line (and less coding for us). Duh, <> the #! line. I'm awake now, though. ;) Grant M. I've gotta stop getting up before noon.

Re: require < 6.x

Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "NeonEdge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whisper ed: | This is probably way too late, but does this make any sense: could p6 allow | (for the first few versions anyway) a "require <6;" directive? Do you understand how the current "require #;" works? It already pretty

newPMC() (was: Re: PDD 2, vtables)

Dan Sugalski wrote: > Grab one via a utility function. getPMC() or something of the sort. > > newPMC() ? ;-) I think we shouldn't rule out the possibility of having multiple newPMC() style functions for grabbing PMCs used for different activities (eg lexicals vs tmps vs guaranteed-to-have-refcoun

lazy || and vtables

Following up from a thread a couple of weeks ago, Dan wrote: > > Dave wrote: > >Hmmm, I can't quite how that trick works. How whould the following get > >evaluated: > > > >$opened || open(F, ...) > > The second PMC would point to a lazy list, so it wouldn't be evaluated > unless its value gets f

require < 6.x

This is probably way too late, but does this make any sense: could p6 allow (for the first few versions anyway) a "require <6;" directive? My thought was that during the install process, the admin would be prompted as to whether or not they wished to retain 'full' backward compatibility, and if

RE: C Garbage collector

I agree with Damien that the Sun description sounds less portable, which we all know in the Perl world is crucial (>80 ports)(although Sun mentions 16-bit DOS/Win). Any GC implementation needs to try to 'not break' the existing stuff. Other questions are somewhat dependent upon what language is us

Re: C Garbage collector

On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Alan Burlison wrote: > Alan Burlison wrote: > > > I've attached the HTML > > Well it was there when I sent it... does this list strip attachments or > something? yes, it does. It is usually just misconfigured mailers or spam. -- ask bjoern hansen -

Re: RFC archive?

On Tue, 20 Feb 2001, Matthew Cline wrote: > What's the URL for the RFC archive? always try google first. http://www.google.com/search?q=perl6+rfc+index would have let you straight to http://dev.perl.org/rfc/ - ask -- ask bjoern hansen -