Well, it would be nice to have it at:
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/exegesis/
But the following from the O'Reilly user group newsletter may help
***Exegesis 6
Damian Conway explains how the new syntax and semantics of subroutines
in Perl 6 make for cleaner, simpler, and more powerful cod
> "BG" == Benjamin Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
BG> Miko O Sullivan wrote:
>>
>> Congratulations to Damian on a great opening in Ex 6. Anybody can spoof
>> the classic detective novel setup, but it takes real talent to have it
>> actually make sense in the context of a tech
> Miko O Sullivan wrote:
> >
> > Congratulations to Damian on a great opening in Ex 6. Anybody can spoof
> > the classic detective novel setup, but it takes real talent to have it
> > actually make sense in the context of a technical document.
>
> How long till Ex 6 is online, for those of us wh
Miko O Sullivan wrote:
>
> Congratulations to Damian on a great opening in Ex 6. Anybody can spoof
> the classic detective novel setup, but it takes real talent to have it
> actually make sense in the context of a technical document.
How long till Ex 6 is online, for those of us who weren't ther
On 8/1/03 11:44 AM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Is it possible with the new parameter declaration syntax to declare
> a mandatory name-only parameter?
My earlier plea for this feature begins here:
http://archive.develooper.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg14666.html
I didn't think I made much headway, but thi
On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 04:33:19PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >Hence, making C<%_> mean something different in core Perl 5 might possibly be
> > >"forwards incompatible".
>
> Representing the Backwards Compatiblity Police, I've had co-workers
