On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 11:06:17PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: Since the line between rules and subs is already blurring significantly,
: I want to blur it a little more. I want to write rules which can take
: parameters.
No problem. That's how the arguments to rules like are
already passed. If
Rod Adams writes:
> Since the line between rules and subs is already blurring significantly,
> I want to blur it a little more. I want to write rules which can take
> parameters.
No no no! That's too powerful.
Wow, skimming through both S5 and A5 and I see no mention of such a
thing. I know w
Since the line between rules and subs is already blurring significantly,
I want to blur it a little more. I want to write rules which can take
parameters.
Consider that I am parsing HTML (a very frequent occurrence), and wish
to make a Rule that matches a balanced tag from open to close. I wa
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 10:52:58AM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
: One could imagine implementing this by creating the scopes as instances
: of an object, and then binding the object's attributes onto the
: variables (i.e. "our $foo := $obj.bar"). The "scope space" object would
: then be the set of g
Alex Burr writes:
> On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 03:36:42PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > But the biggest problem is that if the user overloads 'equal' on two
> > objects, the hash should consider them equal. We could require that to
> > overload 'equal', you also have to overload .hash so that you've
On Sun, Feb 27, 2005 at 03:36:42PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> But the biggest problem is that if the user overloads 'equal' on two
> objects, the hash should consider them equal. We could require that to
> overload 'equal', you also have to overload .hash so that you've given
> some thought to th
