Going meta to tagmemic rhetoric (was Re: Loop controls)

2002-04-27 Thread Allison Randal
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 12:50:49PM +0200, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Here's another possibility. People trust Larry to get it right and > don't feel the need to weigh in with opinions. I trust Larry. That's actually why I feel free to play the devil's advocate. I trust him to toss the dross and

Re: Loop controls

2002-04-27 Thread tex
Allison Randal wrote: > Hmmm... some discussion generated on this subject, but fairly light. I > take that as an indicator that an C on loops is a fairly popular > idea. The other possibilities are that b) people don't want any form of > "else" on loops and aren't saying so or c) people simply don

Re: Loop controls

2002-04-27 Thread Damian Conway
Allison wrote: > > This leads me to conclude that a normal (trailing, un-nested) C > > is a much more reasonable construct for a C -- and at least > > arguable for a C. > > And C, I hope. Sure. I always think of a C as just a C with delusions of grandeur. ;-) Of course, one would expect a comp

Re: Loop controls

2002-04-27 Thread Allison Randal
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 10:53:09PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote: > Allison wrote: > > > And the discussion of scope led to (what I think is) an interesting > > tidbit on NAMED blocks... > > Which I presume was that the proposed usage: > > while $result.get_next() -> $next { > # do som

Using closures for regex control

2002-04-27 Thread Me
[modified repost due to warnock's dilemma] Would something like these DWIM? # match pat1 _ pat2 and capture pat2 match: / pat1 { ($foo) = / pat2 / } / # match pat1 _ 'foo bar': / pat1 { 'foo bar' } / # match pat2 if not pat1 / { ! /pat1/ } pat2 } / # match pat2 if

Re: Loop controls

2002-04-27 Thread Damian Conway
Allison wrote: > As I was talking to Damian, he came up with a compelling semantic > argument why we would want C blocks to follow, which is a question > that needed to be faced since we rejected C. Specifically, the semantic argument with that idea is that CAPITAL blocks attach automatic behavi

Re: Loop controls

2002-04-27 Thread Paul Johnson
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 05:20:06AM -0500, Allison Randal wrote: > Hmmm... some discussion generated on this subject, but fairly light. I > take that as an indicator that an C on loops is a fairly popular > idea. The other possibilities are that b) people don't want any form of > "else" on loops a

Re: Loop controls

2002-04-27 Thread Allison Randal
Hmmm... some discussion generated on this subject, but fairly light. I take that as an indicator that an C on loops is a fairly popular idea. The other possibilities are that b) people don't want any form of "else" on loops and aren't saying so or c) people simply don't care, but silence and apath