Larry wrote:
On the other hand, I suspect most people will end up declaring it
int method
self:rotate (int $a is rw) {...}
in any event, and reserve the =rotate for .=rotate, which can never put
the = on the left margin, even if we let ourselves have whitespace
before POD directives. S
Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 01:18:52PM -0800, chromatic wrote:
: On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 13:04, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: > Well, okay, not a boolean. More like a troolean.
:
: Unless it's a falselean.
It's more truelean than falselean by a 2/3rds majority. And it's
much more if you in
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 01:18:52PM -0800, chromatic wrote:
: On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 13:04, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: > Well, okay, not a boolean. More like a troolean.
:
: Unless it's a falselean.
It's more truelean than falselean by a 2/3rds majority. And it's
much more if you include 2, -2, 3, -3
On Thu, 2004-03-11 at 13:04, Larry Wall wrote:
> Well, okay, not a boolean. More like a troolean.
Unless it's a falselean.
-- c
On 3/11/04 4:04 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 12:43:22PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> : Which is precisely the problem with something like
> :
> : $a cmp= $b
> :
> : insofar as $a is being treated as a string at one moment and as a boolean
> : at the next.
>
> Well, okay, not
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 12:43:22PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: Which is precisely the problem with something like
:
: $a cmp= $b
:
: insofar as $a is being treated as a string at one moment and as a boolean
: at the next.
Well, okay, not a boolean. More like a troolean.
Larry
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 02:05:55PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:11:54AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > On the final hand, if people fall in love with both self:sort and =sort, we
: > could have =sort be a shorthand for self:sort where it's unambiguous.
:
: Wouldn't
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:11:54AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On the final hand, if people fall in love with both self:sort and =sort, we
> could have =sort be a shorthand for self:sort where it's unambiguous.
Wouldn't =sort potentially muck with POD?
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECT
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 06:49:44AM -0800, Gregor N. Purdy wrote:
: So, will "mutatingness" be a context we'll be able to inquire on
: in the implementation of a called routine?
Probably not, but it's vaguely possible you could somehow get a
reference to what is being assigned to, if available, and
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 11:38:11AM +, Andy Wardley wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > multi sub *scramble (String $s) returns String {...}
: [...]
: > Or you can just call it directly as a function:
: > scramble("hello")
:
: Can you also call scramble as a class method?
:
: class String
Larry --
So, will "mutatingness" be a context we'll be able to inquire on
in the implementation of a called routine? Or, could we provide
a specialized distinct implementation for mutating that would get
called if .=X() is used? If we are performing some operation on
large data, and we know the en
> "AW" == Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AW> What about ? is as a ternary operator:
AW> @foo?bar:baz;
IIRC, that was changed to ?? :: because larry wanted the single ? for
more important uses. also doubling the ? made it more like &&, || which
are related logical ops.
and ?
Larry Wall wrote:
> Yet another approach is to *replace* dot with something that mutates:
>
> @array!sort
> @array?sort
>
> Either of those would work syntactically in that case, since neither !
> nor ? is expected as a binary operator.
What about ? is as a ternary operator:
@foo?ba
Larry Wall wrote:
> multi sub *scramble (String $s) returns String {...}
[...]
> Or you can just call it directly as a function:
> scramble("hello")
Can you also call scramble as a class method?
class String is extended {
method scramble { ..etc... }
}
String.scramble("hello")
14 matches
Mail list logo
