* Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/16/2001 11:25]:
>
> I recently received the following email from someone whose name I
> have snipped.
>
> > * Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/16/2001 08:11]:
> > >
> > > Ok, this is basically a bunch of "me too!"s.
> >
> > Keep the snide comments
Ariel Scolnicov writes:
> Am I the only one here who's confused?
>
> How does the printing happen in the correct order? I mean, if I said
>
> my $x = "Post order: &show($root, $post)\n";
> print $x;
>
> then (I hope) we're agreed printing would happen in the *wrong* order
> (first the
Felicitations.
Yours, &c, Tony Olekshy
I recently received the following email from someone whose name I
have snipped.
> * Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/16/2001 08:11]:
> >
> > Ok, this is basically a bunch of "me too!"s.
>
> Keep the snide comments to yourself. Thanks.
This was regarding a reply I had made
At 10:51 AM 5/16/01 +0200, Carl Johan Berglund wrote:
>At 15.02 -0700 01-05-15, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>> $*ARGS is chomped;
>>
>>I wonder if that wouldn't be better phrased as:
>>
>>autochomp $*ARGS;# $ARGS.autochomp
>
>I see your point, but I see a clear difference between these propertie
* Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/15/2001 17:49]:
>
> Is that autochomp as a keyword or autochomp as an indirect method call
> on $*ARGS?
Who cares? ;-)
> > The thing I worry about is this: I don't think actions should be
> > declared using "is", necessarily.
> >
> >$STDERR is fl
Mark Koopman writes:
: now we can all be linguists!
As they say:
It used to be I couldn't spell lingrist, and now I are one.
Larry
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 09:24:33AM -0700, Mark Koopman wrote:
> > Will ebonics be included in this locale thingy?
> it better, or that's discrimination :|
YM "that be discrimination" HTH.
--
If computer science was a science, computer "scientists" would study what
computer systems do and draw
David Grove wrote:
>>--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser locale-aware so
>>>it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
>>>I thought that was in the list of things you'd need to take into
>>>account when you
> --- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser locale-aware so
> > it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
> > I thought that was in the list of things you'd need to take into
> > account when you wrote the parser...
--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 07:40 AM 5/16/2001 -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
> >--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser
> locale-aware so
> > > it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
>
Ok, this is basically a bunch of "me too!"s.
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Awesome. Simple, Perlish, easy to read, etc. Also, I see you took the
> suggestion of:
>
>Access through... Perl 5 Perl 6
>= == ==
>Array
At 07:40 AM 5/16/2001 -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
>--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser locale-aware so
> > it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
> > I thought that was in the list of things you'd need to
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 07:40:19AM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
> mios @ventanas son inmutables;
It's all part of the secret plan to make Perl *even more* unmaintainable. :)
--
CLUELESSNESS:
There are No Stupid Questions,
But There Are a LOT of Inquisitive Idiots
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:30:07PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > - A while ago, someone suggested that the word 'has' be an alias
> > for 'is', so that when you roll your own properties, you could write
> > more-grammatically-correct statements suc
--- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser locale-aware so
> it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
> I thought that was in the list of things you'd need to take into
> account when you wrote the parser... ;-P
mi
Jumping the gun a little
With the pluggable parser architecture, would it be a Good/Bad/Ugly Thing to
freeze the parser itself after each Perl release?
One of the omnipresent arguments against any change is how it affects legacy.
Although Perl 6[.0] is a recognizable departure from Perl 5
At 14.07 +0200 01-05-16, Bart Lateur wrote:
>This person obviously expects a pipe effect, i.e. capturing of the
>"printed" output.
>
>Should Perl6 provide one? Is print() really easier to grasp, than
>'return $buffer', with possibly lots of '$buffer.=$append' in the sub?
>Actually, yes, the latter
On Wed, 16 May 2001 13:49:42 +0200, Carl Johan Berglund wrote:
>sub show {print "6"}
>print "Perl ${show()}\n";
>
>(That prints "6Perl", not "Perl 6".)
>
>If you want to call the subroutine in the middle of the string, you
>should make it _return_ something, not print it.
This person obviously
At 10.39 +0300 01-05-16, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
>How does the printing happen in the correct order? I mean, if I said
>
> my $x = "Post order: &show($root, $post)\n";
> print $x;
>
>then (I hope) we're agreed printing would happen in the *wrong* order
>(first the output of show($root, $po
At 15.02 -0700 01-05-15, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>The only worry/problem/etc that I wonder about is the potential overuse
>of the "is" keyword. It is a very nice syntactic tool, but when I see
>something like this:
>
>$*ARGS is chomped;
>
>I wonder if that wouldn't be better phrased as:
>
>aut
Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Edward Peschko writes:
> > Ok, question here. Are these exegesises 'blessed'? What is open to
> > debate on this?
>
> As Simon says, ask whatever questions you want.
>
> > print "Post order: "; show($root,$post); print "\n";
> > would be better
22 matches
Mail list logo
