Re: RFC 103 (v1) Fix print "$r->func" and $pkg::$var precedence

Nathan Wiger wrote: > Bart Lateur wrote: > > Why interpolate "$obj->method" and not "Class->method"? > > This is a decent point worth considering. > > I think another way to look at it which is more accurrate is that -> is > special in many cases already: > >/$foo->{blah}/ # -> special

Re: RFC 127 (v1) Sane resolution to large function returns

Chaim Frenkel wrote: > > "GL" == Glenn Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > GL> Chaim Frenkel wrote: > >> ($foo, $baz, @bar) = (1,(2,3),4) # $foo = 1 $baz=2, @bar=(3,4) > >> > >> Actually, looking at it like that makes it an ugly situation. The 'new' > >> expectation would be to have it

Re: $a in @b

> Quantum::Superpositions provides this in a more flexible way by adding the > 'any' and 'all' keywords. > > Superpositions.pm> > > One of Damian Conway's many promised RFCs will cover in

Re: $a in @b

> "Chaim" == Chaim Frenkel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "TC" == Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> grep { $_ == 1 } 1..1_000_000 >>> grep doesn't short-circuit. TC> I never did figure out why "last" {w,sh,c}ouldn't be made to do TC> that very thing. Chaim> Hey, I suggeste

Re: $a in @b

> "DC" == Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DC> I would propose that the C operation should short-circuit if the DC> block throws an exception, with the value of the expection determining DC> whether the final invocation of the block should accept the element it DC> was filtering: Wh

Re: $a in @b

> "TC" == Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> grep { $_ == 1 } 1..1_000_000 >> grep doesn't short-circuit. TC> I never did figure out why "last" {w,sh,c}ouldn't be made to do TC> that very thing. Hey, I suggested that a while ago, but Randal shot it down. Something about the bl

Re: RFC 114 (v2) Perl resource configuration

> "TC" == Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> but that is the user's to set. PERL_PRELOAD TC> is there for the user to unset. >> allows the admin to globally >> set (in the system shell rc file) the rc files that perl will load. TC> And what sorts of things might the admin car

RE: RFC 199 (v2) Another question...

> Would it be possible to expand the function prototypes so that a function > could be defined to take a loop block instead of a code block? I'm not sure what you mean here. Damian

Re: Beefier prototypes (was Re: Multiple for loop variables)

> >> my_while { pred() } { # don't gimme no Tcl flac. > >> ... > >> } # no semicolon needed here! > > DC> Just added to the RFC :-) > > How would the parser handle this? Some '}' would need ';' some don't. The trailing C<&> parameter specification tells the parser that there

Re: Beefier prototypes (was Re: Multiple for loop variables)

On 10 Sep 2000 00:33:43 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote: >PS> Yes, please. I view the flattening of lists as a feature, not a bug, and >PS> it has made Perl a lot easier to understand IMHO. > >I view it as a mis-feature. I'm sorry to disagree. But flattening of argument lists is one of those things

Re: RFC 179 (v1) More functions from set theory to manipulate arrays

> "TC" == Tom Christiansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> But, Do you really think that all these ingenuities, to not use another >> term, are really natural and easy to understand to novice programmers ? TC> Until you start thinking of terms of hashes, you aren't thinking TC> in Perl. It s