On Saturday, November 2, 2002, at 08:33 AM, Simon Cozens wrote:
More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen
here
already?) about characters sets, encodings, mail quoting issues, in
fact, anything other than Perl, will be rife on every Perl-related
mailing list
I guess I d
Larry wrote:
I am overstating the case
when I say there's no boolean type in Perl. What I really mean is that
there is no such thing as a single true "true" value.
Curiously, junctions do get us quite close to the possibility of
canonical true and false values:
my $false is constant = any(0
Simon Cozens wrote:
Of course, scary 50K keyboards aren't really necessary. All we really need is
a keybord with configurable keys. That is, each key has an LED, or OLED,
or digital plastic surface, and an index key that allows you to select the
Unicode block to be currently mapped onto the keybo
Larry Wall wrote:
Well, the other guys are suggesting bow tie operators, so maybe we should keep
«foo bar baz» with French quotes, and go with @a »*« @b for vector multiply.
I wouldn't have a problem with that.
That suggests to me that the circumlocution could be >>*<<.
A five character mu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damian Conway) writes:
> Of course, scary 50K keyboards aren't really necessary. All we really need is
> a keybord with configurable keys. That is, each key has an LED, or OLED,
> or digital plastic surface, and an index key that allows you to select the
> Unicode block to be cur
Piers Cawley wrote:
So, on the train this morning, I had a moment of Satori. What's wrong
with doing what we think of as bitwise operations using the flexops
and adding a 'bitwise' context? So, a bitwise op becomes:
bitwise ( $a | $b | $c & $d );
And the superposition will collapse in a 'mas
Simon Cozens wrote:
On the other hand, maybe I'm being as shortsighted as Thomas J Watson
[1] and that once the various operating systems do get their Unicode
support together and we see the introduction of the 50,000 key keyboard,
Of course, scary 50K keyboards aren't really necessary. All we
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Wheeler) writes:
> You keep saying
I didn't think I was doing it habitually.
> or suggesting that the idea of using Unicode operators
> is "idiotic." Perhaps you could make an argument in support that
> assertion (as Luke and Paul have done).
Sure:
> > More and more c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Markus Laire) writes:
> It may seem idiotic to the egocentric people who only needs chars a-z
> in his language. But for all others (think about Chinese), Unicode is
> real asset.
I don't often think about Chinese. Chinese is hard. But I think about
Japanese a lot of the time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Johnson) writes:
> > > More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen here
> > > already?) about characters sets, encodings, mail quoting issues, in
> > > fact, anything other than Perl, will be rife on every Perl-related
> > > mailing list if we persist w
On 2002.11.01 19:06 Simon Cozens wrote:
> More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen here
> already?) about characters sets, encodings, mail quoting issues, in
> fact, anything other than Perl, will be rife on every Perl-related
> mailing list if we persist with this idiotic
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 07:07:43AM -0800, Austin Hastings wrote:
> I don't recall the terminology, but I believe that "0 but true" is a
> value with a "fillintheblank" (attribute?). What happens when you stick
> "0 but true" into a bit?
$z = 0 but true;
my bit $x = $z; # $x ==
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 12:06:07AM +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen here
> already?) about characters sets, encodings, mail quoting issues, in
> fact, anything other than Perl, will be rife on every Perl-related
> mailing list if we pers
On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Ed Peschko wrote:
> I'm probably opening up a whole new can of worms here, but if we said
> that the following were both vector operators:
>
> ^ == intersection operator
> v == union operator
>
> then these could have potentially useful meanings on their *own* as se
On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 04:06 PM, Simon Cozens wrote:
More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen here
already?) about characters sets, encodings, mail quoting issues, in
fact, anything other than Perl, will be rife on every Perl-related
mailing list if we persist w
Luke Palmer writes:
>
> What _are_ you talking about. IIRC, there were never any plans for
> such a "placeholder." There were the placeholder _variables_, $^x et
> al., but the underscore was never used for such a thing. That could
> be why I've been so confused by some of your examples.
--- Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Friday, November 1, 2002, at 08:02 AM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> >> When someone asks "what's the boolean type in Perl?" I'd rather
> >> answer "bit" than "Perl doesn't have one", if for no other reason
> >> than the latter answer will complete
On (02/11/02 11:18), Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat wrote:
> Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 11:18:22 +0100 (CET)
> From: Philippe 'BooK' Bruhat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [RFC] Perl6 Operator List, Take 5
>
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
>
> > Lar
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 06:07:34AM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> I do most of my work over an ssh connection to my favorite server,
> through gnome-terminal. gnome-terminal does not support unicode, so
> this whole thread has been filled with ?'s and \251's. I can't see a
> thing...
gnome-terminal
On Sat, Nov 02, 2002 at 02:44:39PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote:
> On 2 Nov 2002 at 0:06, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Zimmerman) writes:
> > > Larry has been consistently using
> > >
> > > OxAB op 0xBB
> > >
> > > in his messages to represent a (French quote) hyperop,
> > >
> From: "Markus Laire" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2002 14:44:39 +0200
>
> On 2 Nov 2002 at 0:06, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen here
> > already?) about characters sets, encodings, mail quoting issues, in
> > fact, anything oth
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 01:15:05 +0200
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.12, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> Michael Lazzaro writes:
>
> > magical whitespace modifier:
> >
> >_ - Whe
On 2 Nov 2002 at 0:06, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Zimmerman) writes:
> > Larry has been consistently using
> >
> > OxAB op 0xBB
> >
> > in his messages to represent a (French quote) hyperop,
> > (corresponding to the Unicode characters 0x00AB and 0x00BB)
>
> More and more
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
> Larry mused:
>
> > Of course, Real Mathematicians will want [1..10) and (1..10] instead.
> >
>
> Forgive me but is this syntax really necessary.
> Does it buy us enough over +1 and -1?
And for what it's worth, Real Mathematicians do not use open interva
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Zimmerman) writes:
> Larry has been consistently using
>
> OxAB op 0xBB
>
> in his messages to represent a (French quote) hyperop,
> (corresponding to the Unicode characters 0x00AB and 0x00BB)
More and more conversations like this, (and how many have we seen here
alrea
25 matches
Mail list logo
