At 11:40 AM 1/25/2002 -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:43:07 -0500, Damian Conway wrote:
> >
> > >What we're cleaning up is the ickiness of having things declared outside
> > >the braces be lexical to the bra
I would not be appalled if Perl 6 were to assume use
of caps for catcher block labels, but I would still like to
see Larry et al reconsider this design choice.
One suggestion is use of label syntax for catcher
blocks (suggests "come-from"). If catch and CATCH
were defined as synonyms, then one co
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 06:03:55PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> Do they need to? In the simple case, the hyperoperator provides list
> context to its arguments, but just calls the scalar operation repeatedly
> to fake up the list operation.
Cool. So as far as the parser cares, ^ is simply a flag
Simon Cozens writes:
: I'm trying to answer the question "what does ^ mean?".
: Can anything be hyperoperated, or just a built-in set of operations?
Probably anything that is sufficiently "scalar" in its typology.
: If "anything", can user's subroutines be hyperoperated?
Why not? (Provided the
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 05:07:48PM -0800, Dew-Jones, Malcolm MSER:EX wrote:
> Lets add an .interpolate method. The parameter(s) are rules that control
> the interpolation, and the returned value is the interpolated string using
> those rules.
>
> $result = 'scalar $vars (only) will be inte
Hello, I was reading stuff on the perl6 web site, and had some ideas about
string interpolation rules. Is this a place to send this?
String interpolation should be controlled by the programmer on a string by
string basis, or on more global quote-type by quote type basis.
---
scenar
>>Besides no one has commented on Steve Fink's (I think it was him) idea
>>to store the result of the most recently executed conditional in $?. I
>>kinda like that idea myself. It makes mnemonic sense.
H . . . I could grow used to that. A couple of thoughts.
1) It doesn't seem to buy us muc
At 11:40 AM 01-25-2002 -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff you wrote:
>On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:43:07 -0500, Damian Conway wrote:
> >
> > >What we're cleaning up is the ickiness of having things declared outside
> > >the braces be lexical to th
Falling back on the "numbers is strings, too" legacy:
$a = 100;
$b = "000";
$c = ($a _ $b) + 1;
# I'd expect $c == 11.
If I say:
$a = 1 _ 000 _ 000;
or
$a = 1_000_000;
DWIM (In scalar context, coerce arguments to strings).
(Frankly, I think this is unlikely. But who knows?)
If course,
> Should we be allowed to use _ to group numbers, now that _ is concat?
> If not _, then what? (if anything?)
Sure. In Perl 5, we have 123.456 and a . b, but in Perl 6, we will have
123_456 and 123 _ 456. People have to put space around '_' anway.
Hong
On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 12:38, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> On Friday 25 January 2002 12:34, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > Should we be allowed to use _ to group numbers, now that _ is concat?
> > If not _, then what? (if anything?)
>
> Sure, why not? '_' is still a valid character in an identifier. You'd
I'm trying to answer the question "what does ^ mean?".
Can anything be hyperoperated, or just a built-in set of operations?
If "anything", can user's subroutines be hyperoperated? How will they
know that they're being called in "hyper context"? If a built-in set
of operations, which ones?
--
You
On Friday 25 January 2002 12:34, Simon Cozens wrote:
> Should we be allowed to use _ to group numbers, now that _ is concat?
> If not _, then what? (if anything?)
Sure, why not? '_' is still a valid character in an identifier. You'd
still simply need disambiguating whitespace for concatenation
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 11:57:25AM +0100, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:43:07 -0500, Damian Conway wrote:
>
> >What we're cleaning up is the ickiness of having things declared outside
> >the braces be lexical to the braces. *That's* hard to explain to beginners.
>
> But it's handy.
Should we be allowed to use _ to group numbers, now that _ is concat?
If not _, then what? (if anything?)
--
Hanlon's Razor:
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained
by stupidity.
On Mon, 21 Jan 2002 15:43:07 -0500, Damian Conway wrote:
>What we're cleaning up is the ickiness of having things declared outside
>the braces be lexical to the braces. *That's* hard to explain to beginners.
But it's handy. And that was, until now, what mattered with Perl.
--
Bart.
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:50:38PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> In most other languages, you wouldn't even have the opportunity to put
> a declaration into the conditional. You'd have to say something like:
>
> my $line = <$in>;
> if $line ne "" { ... }
>
> Since
>
> if my $line = <$
17 matches
Mail list logo
