"Dulcimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I find C too terse, and would
> rather see a more verbose version
I'm obviously more lazy than you ;-).
> Ah. Ok, but if that's the case, you could as easily write it
>
>timeout(5) { coro { ... } };
>
> and have the com
--- Dave Whipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Dulcimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > > But exposing the object like that still bothers be: I shouldn't
> > > need the $tmp, nor the .new.
> >
> > I'm not so sure I agree with losing the new(). I kinda like that
> > just for readability. Less isn't al
"Dulcimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > But exposing the object like that still bothers be: I shouldn't need
> > the $tmp, nor the .new.
>
> I'm not so sure I agree with losing the new(). I kinda like that just
> for readability. Less isn't always more. :)
>
> Ok, how about this:
>
> sub slow_fn
> > sub slow_fn {
> > my $pause = 1;
> > my $timer is last { .stop } = new Timer secs => $pause++,
> >reset => {$pause++},
> > code => {print "."};
> > return slow_fn_imp @_;
> > }
>
> I'm think
"Dulcimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > so that the timer goes off after a
second, prints a dot, and resets
> itself to go off again after another second? And I still like the idea
> of an expanding temporal window between dots:
>
> sub slow_fn {
> my $pause = 1;
> my $timer is last { .sto
--- Dave Whipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dulcimer wrote:
> >>sub slow_fn {
> >> my $tick = Timer.new(60, { print "..." });
> >> return slow_fn_imp @_;
> >>}
> >>
> >>Now if I could just get the compiler to not complain about that
> >>unused variable...
> >
> >
> > Maybe I'm being dense...
