Note: My answers are non-authoritative. Don't trust me.
> Can we please have a 'reverse x' modifier that means "treat whitespace as
> literals"? Yes, we are living in a Unicode world now and your data could
> theoretically be coming in from a different character set than expected.
> But there
At 10:59 PM -0700 6/6/02, Dave Storrs wrote:
>Page 8:
>
>The u1-u3 mods all say "level 1 support". I assume this was a typo, and
>they should go (u1 => 'level 1', u2 => 'level 2', u3 => 'level 3').
Yeah. I'd avoid these if you can manage. There's not a whole lot of
reason to mandate Unicode in
Dave Storrs wrote:
> I admit I'm a bit nervous about that...so far, I'm completely sold on
> (basically) all the new features and changes in Perl 6, and I'm eagerly
> anticipating working with them. But this level of change...I don't know.
> I've spent a lot of time getting to be (reasonaly) goo
Well, A5 definitely has my head spinning. The new features seem amazingly
powerful...it almost feels like we're going to have two equally powerful,
equally complex languages living side-by-side: one of them is called
"Perl" and the other one is called "Regexes". Although they may talk to
one an
Larry Wall:
# On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
#
# > Brent Dax wrote:
# >
# > > grammar Perl6::Regex {
# > > rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
# > >
# > > rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
# >
# > Or just:
# >
# > rule ws
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
> Brent Dax wrote:
>
> > grammar Perl6::Regex {
> > rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
> >
> > rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
>
> Or just:
>
> rule ws { [\s|\#\N*]*
Brent Dax wrote:
> grammar Perl6::Regex {
> rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
>
> rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
Or just:
rule ws { [\s|\#\N*]* }
> rule atom { ( | \\ . | ) }
>
> rule m
Larry discounted RFC261 in A5, but I think there's some good in it. The
biggest problem is not that it's hard to do in Perl6, but that 80-90% of
it is ALREADY done in Perl5! Once you peel away that portion of the RFC,
you get to Perl5's limitations and what Perl6 might do to support these
things.
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 08:21:25PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No, because rules are basically methods, just like grammars are
> > basically classes. You would only need a semi-colon if you were defining
> > an anonymous C (similar to an anonymous
Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 10:38:39AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
>> On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
>> > rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
>>
>> No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
>> rules" for that type
Whew! I've carefully (well, I tried to be careful :-) read through
Apocalypse 5 twice now and it still makes my head hurt (but in a good
way). What follows is some notes that I jotted down and am tired of
looking at. Please correct any misconceptions and feel free to add
where I've omitted.
He
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Buddha Buck wrote:
> At 11:31 AM 06-06-2002 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
> I had gotten the impression that a literal string separated by whitespace
> was an atom, so
>
> rule foofoobar { foo <1,2> bar }
>
> would match 'foobar' or 'foofoobar'. If so, I think needs to
> be re
At 11:31 AM 06-06-2002 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
>#Preliminary Perl6::Regex
># This does not have any actions, but otherwise I think is correct.
># Let me know if it's right or not.
I'm not a regex guru, but...
>use 6;
>
>grammar Perl6::Regex {
> rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>
#Preliminary Perl6::Regex
# This does not have any actions, but otherwise I think is correct.
# Let me know if it's right or not.
use 6;
grammar Perl6::Regex {
rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
rule
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 10:38:39AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> > rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
>
> No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
> rules" for that type of thing... :)
No, because rules are basically met
On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
rules" for that type of thing... :)
-John
At 6:10 PM +1000 6/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
>> Rich sez:
>> But make Damian use "es", rather than "egs" for the
>> eigenstate ("is" :-) operator.
s/"is"/"it"/, above (blush). That is, the superposition _could_ be in
any of several states, but the eigenstate tells us what "it"
For the record, you will hear no disagreement from me. I recognize that
this is a HARD problem. Nonetheless, I think it's an important one, and
solving it (even imperfectly, by only supporting well-defined platforms)
would be a major coup.
--Josh
At 23:31 on 06/05/2002 BST, Nicholas Clark
> Rich sez:
>But make Damian use "es", rather than "egs" for the
>eigenstate ("is" :-) operator.
No, no, no! "any" and "all" are three letters, so the eigenstate operator has
to be as well. And since the eigenstates are *examples" of the possible states
of a superposition, "egs" i
At 4:54 PM +1000 6/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
>Even if Larry decides against superpositions, there will definitely be some
>kind of non-quantum iterator syntax that supports these kinds of permuted
>sequences.
Vicki sez:
Larry? Oh, Larrry.
Pretty please include quantum superpos
20 matches
Mail list logo
