First off, I'll point out that this belongs on p6l and nowhere else.
Edward Peschko writes:
> It all comes down to what you think is a 'low level' op.. Some
> languages think that regular expressions themselves aren't low level
> enough to be included in the language, perl thinks that it is
> low-
The Perl 6 Summary for the week ending 2004-09-17
Another week, another summary, and I'm running late. So:
This week in perl6-compiler
The current state of the compiler
Discussion of the current state of the nascent perl 6 compiler and how
best to contribute to its development even b
On Wed, 2004-09-22 at 10:49, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Let me come right round to my point about perl being open source.
> Someone has to do the work somewhere, and making it "standard" or "core"
> doesn't change that. It just means that it'll take longer.
It also means that there's a possibility tha
Edward Peschko writes:
> > > If you need to match the regex engine in reverse, in a totally unattached way
> > > via subroutine, then I would think the chance for subtle mistakes and errors
> > > would be exceedingly great.
> >
> > I don't understand how.
>
> it means that you have to reimpleme
> > The reason for the modifier (or even a new operator (g/" for example) is that
> > you can easily test your regular expressions. The interface is trivial - all you
> > have
> > to do is switch your m/ out for g/, and sit back and see how your patterns
> > translate
> > into strings.
>
> Ye
> > ok, cool, I'm beginning to understand perl6 patterns a bit better.
> > Just a tiny request though (and I seem to remember this being
> > discussed)
>
> You were the one who initiated the thread :-)
>
Ah yes, I forgot about that. Damn brain cells.. ;-)
> > - I wish that there was an easy syn
