Larry Wall wrote:
You've more or less described the semantics available at the "use
bytes" level, which basically comes down to a pure OO approach where
the user has to be aware of all the types (to the extent that OO
doesn't hide that). It's one approach to polymorphism, but I think
it shortchang
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 05:07:49PM -0600, Rod Adams wrote:
: I propose that we make a few decisions about strings in Perl. I've read
: all the synopses, several list threads on the topic, and a few web
: guides to Unicode. I've also thought a lot about how to cleanly define
: all the string related
It's been pointed out to me that A12 mentions:
Coercions to other classes can also be defined:
multi sub *coerce:as (Us $us, Them ::to) { to.transmogrify($us) }
Such coercions allow both explicit conversion:
$them = $us as Them;
as well as implicit conversions:
my Them $them = $us;
I read
I propose that we make a few decisions about strings in Perl. I've read
all the synopses, several list threads on the topic, and a few web
guides to Unicode. I've also thought a lot about how to cleanly define
all the string related functions that we expect Perl to have in the face
of all this expa
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 09:36:49PM -0500, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
: Nobody on #perl6 today could answer this one. Is:
: Str | Int where { $_ }
: the same as:
: (Str | Int) where { $_ }
: or:
: Str | (Int where { $_ })
: ?
"where" binds looser than |, but it's a member of a select group
Chip Salzenberg writes:
> Nobody on #perl6 today could answer this one. Is:
> Str | Int where { $_ }
> the same as:
> (Str | Int) where { $_ }
I think it's this one. The junctive operators naturally feel pretty
tight precedence, and named operators feel loose.
> or:
> Str | (Int wh
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 03:59:43PM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What it doesn't solve is the $.method vs .method issue. They look
similar
: but one works on the invocant and one works on $_. Still a trap.
Yes, and that's probably the killer of the "oc" idea. So much for
Sleep Brain, heh,
Nobody on #perl6 today could answer this one. Is:
Str | Int where { $_ }
the same as:
(Str | Int) where { $_ }
or:
Str | (Int where { $_ })
?
Followup questions, Mr. President:
What kind of operators are "where", "of", "is", and "will"?
Is there a reason that S03 doesn't list them?
W
Larry Wall kirjoitti:
On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 03:59:43PM -0800, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What it doesn't solve is the $.method vs .method issue. They look similar
: but one works on the invocant and one works on $_. Still a trap.
Yes, and that's probably the killer of the "oc" idea. So much fo
