At 10:04 PM 8/8/00 -0400, Ken Fox wrote:
>Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > DS> To do it generally opens a huge can of worms. Doing it in a limited
> number
> > DS> of cases (int->BigInt, float->BigRat, char->UTF8) is more
> reasonable, and
> > D
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 02:16:37PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> If one does 'use tristate' I would hope they know what they are doing
> or asking for.
>
> And in fact, I would want the warning turned off. One of the pains
> in doing sybperl, is I have to liberally sprinkle $^W=0 or
> do a lot of
Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> DS> To do it generally opens a huge can of worms. Doing it in a limited number
> DS> of cases (int->BigInt, float->BigRat, char->UTF8) is more reasonable, and
> DS> we can certainly manage that.
>
> Why limited? Doesn
In article <01f301cb$90f2ded0$c1252ccb@SAMANTHA>, "Jeremy Howard"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Hughes wrote:
>
> > Surely value == NULL is true iff value really is a null?
>
> No. NULL isn't equal to anything! In SQL, you can only say 'value IS NULL'.
You are of course completely corre
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
DS> At 08:13 AM 8/7/00 +0100, Hildo Biersma wrote:
>> I want the expressions '1 + 3.14' and '3.14 + 1' to work the same, and
>> they do. Using the current perl overloading mechanism, '1 +
>> Math::BigInt' and 'Math::BigInt + 1' also mean the
If one does 'use tristate' I would hope they know what they are doing
or asking for.
And in fact, I would want the warning turned off. One of the pains
in doing sybperl, is I have to liberally sprinkle $^W=0 or
do a lot of defined() ? :, to avoid the warnings.
> "GB" == Graham Barr <[EMAIL
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 06:05:30AM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> What are the issues doing it through the vtbl of 'self'? Though if
> the op does it, there would be a different op under the tristate pragma.
Not true. Right now you get a warning for use of uninit when undef
is used. How about unde
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 11:42:39AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 10:19 AM 8/7/00 +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
> >On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 11:55:33PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > > I was thinking of RFC'ing tri-state logic. Would it be worthwhile to
> > > make it seperate or to extend your RFC?
>
At 08:13 AM 8/7/00 +0100, Hildo Biersma wrote:
>I want the expressions '1 + 3.14' and '3.14 + 1' to work the same, and
>they do. Using the current perl overloading mechanism, '1 +
>Math::BigInt' and 'Math::BigInt + 1' also mean the same (though the hack
>used for this, parameter reversing, is a b
At 10:19 AM 8/7/00 +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 11:55:33PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > I was thinking of RFC'ing tri-state logic. Would it be worthwhile to
> > make it seperate or to extend your RFC?
>
>I had mantioned this before, I forget who to. I think it should be
>p
Ken Fox wrote:
>
> Tom Hughes wrote:
> > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd like to be able to mimic what the rules for nulls are in databases.
> >
> > > NULL == NULL : false
> >
> > Always true surely?
>
> NULL to a database
> "KF" == Ken Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KF> Tom Hughes wrote:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > I'd like to be able to mimic what the rules for nulls are in databases.
>>
>> > NULL == NULL : false
>>
>> Always true surely?
KF
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 11:55:33PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> I was thinking of RFC'ing tri-state logic. Would it be worthwhile to
> make it seperate or to extend your RFC?
I had mantioned this before, I forget who to. I think it should be
possible, but probably via a pragma;
use tristate;
Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to be able to mimic what the rules for nulls are in databases.
>
> > NULL == NULL : false
>
> Always true surely?
NULL to a database means unknown not undefined or uniti
Tom Hughes wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I'd like to be able to mimic what the rules for nulls are in databases.
> > (I only know sybase's rules, so there may be differences between
vendors.
> > Could somone that is aware of the
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd like to be able to mimic what the rules for nulls are in databases.
> (I only know sybase's rules, so there may be differences between vendors.
> Could somone that is aware of the ANSI standard chime in.)
Are
I was thinking of RFC'ing tri-state logic. Would it be worthwhile to
make it seperate or to extend your RFC?
I'd like to be able to mimic what the rules for nulls are in databases.
(I only know sybase's rules, so there may be differences between vendors.
Could somone that is aware of the ANSI sta
On 5 Aug 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://tmtowtdi.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Standardise Handling Of Abnormal Numbers Like Infinities And NaNs
>
Excellent idea.
>
> =head1 REFERENCES
>
> Math::Complex
You might wa
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://tmtowtdi.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Standardise Handling Of Abnormal Numbers Like Infinities And NaNs
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 04 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
19 matches
Mail list logo
