On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 08:31:57PM -0400, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to Michael G Schwern:
> > And this is exactly what File::chdir does. $CWD is a tied scalar.
>
> I don't think current directory maps well on a variable. That won't
> stop people from using it, of course. :-(
>
> There
According to chromatic:
> On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 23:52 +0200, Juerd wrote:
> > Well, after failure it can be cwd() but false without breaking any real
> > code, because normally, you'd never if (cwd) { ... }, simply because
> > there's ALWAYS a cwd.
>
> Not always -- try removing a directory that's
According to Michael G Schwern:
> And this is exactly what File::chdir does. $CWD is a tied scalar.
I don't think current directory maps well on a variable. That won't
stop people from using it, of course. :-(
There are several methods to determine the current directory. Each
one has its corn
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 03:22:48PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:52:38PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: > > becomes an unverifiable operation. You have to use chdir() if you want to
: > > error check and $CWD is reduced to a "scripting" feature.
: >
: > Well, after failure i
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:52:38PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> > becomes an unverifiable operation. You have to use chdir() if you want to
> > error check and $CWD is reduced to a "scripting" feature.
>
> Well, after failure it can be cwd() but false without breaking any real
> code, because normally,
At 16:18 -0700 4/15/05, gcomnz wrote:
>More questions stemming from cookbook work... Decimal Comparisons:
>
>The most common recipe around for comparisons is to use sprintf to cut
>the decimals to size and then compare strings. Seems ugly.
>
>The non-stringification way to do it is usually along th
More questions stemming from cookbook work... Decimal Comparisons:
The most common recipe around for comparisons is to use sprintf to cut
the decimals to size and then compare strings. Seems ugly.
The non-stringification way to do it is usually along the lines of:
if (abs($value1 - $value2) < a
I thought we had just established that nbsp is not in Unicode¹s definition
of whitespace. So why should \s match it?
On 2005-04-15 18:56, "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 12:46:47AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> : Larry Wall skribis 2005-04-15 15:38 (-0700):
> : > : Do
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 12:46:47AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-04-15 15:38 (-0700):
: > : Do \s and match non-breaking whitespace, U+00A0?
: > Yes.
:
: That makes \s+ and \s*, and thus very useless for anything but
: trimming whitespace. For splitting (including word wrapping),
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 12:11:24AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Pasted from pugs/examples/cookbook/01-00introduction.p6:
:
: # XXX - question: How equal are bunches of spaces to tabs?
: # -- I'd say that's a question for perl6lang
This seems to be singularly short on context, but if it has to do w
Larry Wall skribis 2005-04-15 15:38 (-0700):
> : Do \s and match non-breaking whitespace, U+00A0?
> Yes.
That makes \s+ and \s*, and thus very useless for anything but
trimming whitespace. For splitting (including word wrapping), it'd do
exactly the wrong thing.
> : \s is said (in S05) to match
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:44:03PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Is there a -like thingy that is always \s+?
Not currently, since \s+ is there. used to be that, but
currently is defined as the magical whitespace matcher used by :words.
: Do \s and match non-breaking whitespace, U+00A0?
Yes.
: How ab
Aaron Sherman skribis 2005-04-15 18:20 (-0400):
> > Is there a -like thingy that is always \s+?
> Not sure what that means exactly.
is \s* or \s+, depending on its surroundings.
> Thankfully, NBSP (U+00A0) is not Unicode whitespace.
Thanks for sharing this information!
Juerd
--
http://convol
chromatic skribis 2005-04-15 15:18 (-0700):
> > Well, after failure it can be cwd() but false without breaking any real
> > code, because normally, you'd never if (cwd) { ... }, simply because
> > there's ALWAYS a cwd.
> Not always -- try removing a directory that's the pwd of another
> process.
R
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 17:44, Juerd wrote:
> Is there a -like thingy that is always \s+?
Not sure what that means exactly.
> Do \s and match non-breaking whitespace, U+00A0?
As I understood, Perl 6 was going to use the Unicode standard(s) to
determine the whitespacishness of each codepoint. Goin
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 23:52 +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Well, after failure it can be cwd() but false without breaking any real
> code, because normally, you'd never if (cwd) { ... }, simply because
> there's ALWAYS a cwd.
Not always -- try removing a directory that's the pwd of another
process.
-- c
Pasted from pugs/examples/cookbook/01-00introduction.p6:
# XXX - question: How equal are bunches of spaces to tabs?
# -- I'd say that's a question for perl6lang
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_ju
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:12:46PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: Thus spake Larry Wall:
: > Offhand, I guess my main semantic problem with it is that if a chdir
: > fails, you aren't in an undefined location, which the new value of $CWD
: > would seem to indicate. You're just where you were.
Michael G Schwern skribis 2005-04-15 13:12 (-0700):
> To be clear: Only the store operation will return undef on failure.
> Additional fetches on $CWD will continue to return the cwd.
Still breaks
$ref = \($CWD = $foo);
I'm not sure this breakage matters, but if it breaks one thing, it's
Is there a -like thingy that is always \s+?
Do \s and match non-breaking whitespace, U+00A0?
How about:
U+0008 backspace
U+00A0 no break space (Repeated for overview)
U+1361 ethiopic wordspace
U+2000 en quad
U+2001 em quad
U+2002 en space
U+2003 em space
U
Paul Seamons skribis 2005-04-15 13:42 (-0600):
> Each of the declarations my, our and local currently set the value to
> undefined (unless set = to something).
That's not true.
use strict;
$::foo = 5;
our $foo;
print $foo; # 5
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.ht
Thus spake Larry Wall:
> Offhand, I guess my main semantic problem with it is that if a chdir
> fails, you aren't in an undefined location, which the new value of $CWD
> would seem to indicate. You're just where you were. Then the user
> either has to remember that, or there still has to be some
> I'm imagining it will be different, as I expect temp to not hide the old
> thing. I'm not sure it will.
That is another good question. I just searched through the S and A's and
couldn't find if temp will blank it out. I am thinking it will act like
local. Each of the declarations my, our an
I would like to get rid of all those implicit scopes. The only
exception would be that any topicalizing modifier allocates a private
lexical $_ scoped to just that statement. But dynamic scoping may
happen only at explicit block boundaries.
I can see the argument for the other side, where any "d
Paul Seamons skribis 2005-04-15 12:41 (-0600):
> In Perl5
> perl -MData::Dumper -e '%h=qw(a 1 b 2); {local %h; $h{a}="one"; print Dumper
> \%h} print Dumper \%h;
> $VAR1 = {
> 'a' => 'one'
> };
> $VAR1 = {
> 'a' => '1',
> 'b' => '2'
> };
> I'm imaging
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:28:31AM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
: David Wheeler wrote:
:
: >But the first person to write <[a...]> gets what's comin' to 'em.
:
: Is that nothing (since '.' lt 'a'), or everything after 'a'?
Might as well make it everything after 'a' for consistency. One could
also vi
On Friday 15 April 2005 12:28 pm, Juerd wrote:
> temp %h{ %other.keys } = %other.values;
Oops missed that - I like that for solving this particular problem. It does
even work in Perl5:
perl -MData::Dumper -e '%h=qw(a 1 b 2); {local @h{qw(a b)}=("one","two");
print Dumper \%h} print Dumper \%h'
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 13:10, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Aaron Sherman writes:
> > Among the various ways of declaring variables, will Perl 6 have a way to
> > say, "this variable is highly temporary, and may be re-declared within
> > the same scope, or in a nested scope without concern"? I often find
> >
>
> temp %h;
> %h{ %other.keys } = %other.values;
>
> or even
>
> temp %h{ %other.keys } = %other.values;
>
> should work well already?
Almost - but not quite.
In Perl5
perl -MData::Dumper -e '%h=qw(a 1 b 2); {local %h; $h{a}="one"; print Dumper
\%h} print Dumper \%h;
$VAR1 = {
Paul Seamons skribis 2005-04-15 12:16 (-0600):
> For the given example, your code fits perfectly. A more common case I have
> had to deal with is more like this:
> my %h =
> my %other = ;
> {
> temp %h{$_} = %other{$_} for %other.keys;
Either
temp %h;
%h{$_} = %other{$_} for %other.k
On Fri, 2005-04-15 at 11:21 -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 09:17:13AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> > Maybe we could define an "ok" operator that suppresses only the
> > *first* warning produced by its argument(s). Then if you get multiple
> > warnings, you at least get
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon skribis 2005-04-15 11:15 (-0700):
> Anything wrong with:
Yes, moving things around breaks it, as does removing the first. There
is no real dependency on the first $sql and it'd be great if declaration
wouldn't add one.
temp $sql = q{...};
my $sql = q{...};
temp $
On Friday 15 April 2005 11:57 am, Juerd wrote:
> Paul Seamons skribis 2005-04-15 11:50 (-0600):
> > my %h = ;
> > {
> > temp %h{$_} ++ for %h.keys;
>
> Just make that two lines. Is that so bad?
>
> temp %h;
> %h.values »++;
>
For the given example, your code fits perfectly. A more commo
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What I'd really like to say is:
>
> throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
> throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
Anything wrong with:
my $sql = q{...};
temp $sql = q{...};
temp $sql = q{...};
(Assuming C is made to work on lexicals, of cours
Paul Seamons skribis 2005-04-15 11:50 (-0600):
> my %h = ;
> {
> temp %h{$_} ++ for %h.keys;
Just make that two lines. Is that so bad?
temp %h;
%h.values »++;
> %h.say; # values are incremented still
> }
> %h.say; # values are back to original values
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl
The following chunks behave the same in Perl 5.6 as in Perl 5.8. Notice the
output of "branching" statement modifiers vs. "looping" statement modifiers.
perl -e '$f=1; {local $f=2; print "$f"} print " - $f\n"'
# prints 2 - 1
perl -e '$f=1; {local $f=2 if 1; print "$f"} print " - $f\n"
# pr
Aaron Sherman writes:
> Among the various ways of declaring variables, will Perl 6 have a way to
> say, "this variable is highly temporary, and may be re-declared within
> the same scope, or in a nested scope without concern"? I often find
> myself doing:
>
> my $sql = q{...};
> ...do
Rod Adams skribis 2005-04-15 11:53 (-0500):
> Wouldn't some form of trait make more sense:
>my $sql = '...' is ok;
Depends. A unary ok operator would let you pinpoint very easily,
*without* using parens:
ok $fh.print($foo); # no warnings about print (closed fh?)
#
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:04:32PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: No, Ucfirst it can't be, I think. And ALLCAPS is ugly. @ is taken (and
: ugly). Suggestions?
Maybe we could define an "ok" operator that suppresses only the
*first* warning produced by its argument(s). Then if you get multi
David Wheeler wrote:
But the first person to write <[a...]> gets what's comin' to 'em.
Is that nothing (since '.' lt 'a'), or everything after 'a'?
-- Rod Adams
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 09:17:13AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:04:32PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> : No, Ucfirst it can't be, I think. And ALLCAPS is ugly. @ is taken (and
> : ugly). Suggestions?
>
> Maybe we could define an "ok" operator that suppresses only the
> *first* warn
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 06:04:32PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: No, Ucfirst it can't be, I think. And ALLCAPS is ugly. @ is taken (and
: ugly). Suggestions?
Maybe we could define an "ok" operator that suppresses only the
*first* warning produced by its argument(s). Then if you get multiple
warnings, you
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 11:45:16AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: Among the various ways of declaring variables, will Perl 6 have a way to
: say, "this variable is highly temporary, and may be re-declared within
: the same scope, or in a nested scope without concern"? I often find
: myself doing:
:
Aaron Sherman skribis 2005-04-15 11:45 (-0400):
> What I'd really like to say is:
> throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
> throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
I like the idea and propose "a", aliased "an" for this.
> It should probably be illegal to:
> throwawaytmpvar $sql = q{...};
>
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 12:45:14PM +1200, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > Well, only if you stick to a standard dialect. As soon as you start
: > defining your own macros, it gets a little trickier.
:
: Interesting, I hadn't considered that.
:
: Having a quick browse through some of th
Among the various ways of declaring variables, will Perl 6 have a way to
say, "this variable is highly temporary, and may be re-declared within
the same scope, or in a nested scope without concern"? I often find
myself doing:
my $sql = q{...};
...do some DB stuff...
my $sql
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 03:11:59AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: Error handling is simple, a failed chdir returns undef and sets errno.
:
: $CWD = $dir err die "Can't chdir to $dir: $!";
Offhand, I guess my main semantic problem with it is that if a chdir
fails, you aren't in an undefin
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 01:01:58PM -, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> Aaron Sherman wrote in perl.perl6.language :
> >
> > A silly question: is there a canonical character set from which we
> > extract these ranges? Are we hard-coding Unicode here, or is there some
> > way for the user to specify
Aaron Sherman wrote in perl.perl6.language :
>
> A silly question: is there a canonical character set from which we
> extract these ranges? Are we hard-coding Unicode here, or is there some
> way for the user to specify the character set for ranges?
Perl 5 forces [a-z] (or [i-j] for that matter) t
>
> even sillier question:
> if <[a.z]> matches "a", "." and "z"
> and <[a...]> matches all characters from "a" including (for some
> definition of 'all')
>
> how will be range \x21 .. \x2e written?
> <[!..\.]>? (i.e. "." escaped?)
>
I was assuming from Larry's mail that <[a...]> would parse as
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 02:58:44PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> Am I the only one who thinks <[a-z]> is ugly and hard to type because of
> the nested brackets? The same goes for <{...}>. The latter can't easily
> be fixed, I think, but the former perhaps can.
Part of the thinking behind this is that the
Am I the only one who thinks <[a-z]> is ugly and hard to type because of
the nested brackets? The same goes for <{...}>. The latter can't easily
be fixed, I think, but the former perhaps can. If there are more who
think it needs to, that is. And <{}> is a bit easier to type because all
four are shi
- Original Message -
From: "Aaron Sherman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "David Wheeler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Perl6 Language List"
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2005 2:00 PM
Subject: Re: should we change [^a-z] to <-[a..z]> instead of <-[a-z]>?
> On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 21:32 -0700, David Wheeler
On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 21:32 -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 14, 2005, at 7:06 PM, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>
> > So, <[a.z]> matches "a", ".", and "z",
> > while <[a..z]> matches characters "a" through "z" inclusive.
>
> I was going to say that that was inconsistent, but since you ne
David Wheeler skribis 2005-04-14 21:32 (-0700):
> I was going to say that that was inconsistent, but since you never need
> to repeat a letter in a character class, well, I guess it isn't. But
> the first person to write <[a...]> gets what's comin' to 'em.
Given ASCII, <[\x20...]> would then be
I was doing some work on Parrot::Test today and was replacing this code
with something more cross platform.
# Run the command in a different directory
my $command = 'some command';
$command= "cd $dir && $command" if $dir;
system($command);
I replaced it with th
John Williams wrote:
Good point. Another one is: how does the meta_operator determine the
"identity value" for user-defined operators?
Does it have to? The definition of the identity value---BTW, I like
the term "neutral value" better because identity also is a relation
between two values---is tha
57 matches
Mail list logo
