On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 02:22:01PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> And the more general form was:
>
> $sum = reduce { $^a + $^b } @items;
>
> Yes, it is called reduce, because "foldl" is a miserable name.
So, the target of running a loop with both the current
and previous elements accessible cou
Austin Hastings wrote:
1. Requirement to repeat the possibly complex expression for the list.
2. Possible high cost of generating the list.
3. Possible unique nature of the list.
The subroutine addresses #1, but not 2 or 3.
It does address 2. The list is generated once (wherever) and only pa
On 10/1/05, David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All in all, I think that might just be the end of the tunnel up
> ahead. Go us for getting here, and loud applause to @Larry for
> guiding us so well!
Applause for p6l for hashing out the issues that we didn't think of.
I recently wrote a "Pe
Damian Conway wrote:
> Austin Hastings wrote:
>
>> All of these have the same solution:
>>
>> @list = ...
>> for [undef, @list[0...]] ¥ @list ¥ [EMAIL PROTECTED], undef] -> $last, $curr,
>> $next {
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> Which is all but illegible.
>
>
> Oh, no! You mean I might have to write a...sub
On 10/1/05, John Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I forget what the final choice was for syntax for the reduce
> operator (it was probably even a different name from reduce -
> that's the APL name), but it would be given a list and an
> operator and run as:
>
> my $running = op.identity;
So, I was thinking about how $Larry's original plan for doing the
Perl6 design was something along the lines of "write a series of
Apocalypses, one for each chapter of the Camel book". I know that
the latest version of the Apocalypses are in SVN, but I checked
dev.perl.org just to see what
On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:39:58PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Incidentally, the undef problem just vanishes here (being replaced by
> another problem).
Which reminds me that this same issue came up a while ago in a
different guise. There was a long discussion about the reduce
functionality that
On behalf of the Parrot team I'm proud to announce the release of
Parrot 0.3.0. I'd like to thank all involved people as well as our
sponsors for supporting us.
What is Parrot?
Parrot is a virtual machine aimed at running Perl6 and other dynamic
languages.
Parrot 0.3.0 changes and news
- New c
> -Original Message-
> From: Damian Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 8:53 AM
> To: perl6-language@perl.org
> Subject: Re: Look-ahead arguments in for loops
>
> Austin Hastings wrote:
>
> > All of these have the same solution:
> >
> > @list = ...
> > fo
Austin Hastings wrote:
All of these have the same solution:
@list = ...
for [undef, @list[0...]] ¥ @list ¥ [EMAIL PROTECTED], undef] -> $last, $curr,
$next {
...
}
Which is all but illegible.
Oh, no! You mean I might have to write a...subroutine!??
sub contextual (@list) {
ret
On Sat, Oct 01, 2005 at 05:57:54 -0400, Austin Hastings wrote:
> Internally, it may be the same. But with exceptions, it's implemented by
> someone other than the victim, and leveraged by all. That's the kind of
> abstraction I'm looking for. My problem with the whole notion of "Either
> errorMess
Damian Conway wrote:
> Rather than addition Yet Another Feature, what's wrong with just using:
>
> for @list ¥ @list[1...] -> $curr, $next {
> ...
> }
>
> ???
1. Requirement to repeat the possibly complex expression for the list.
2. Possible high cost of generating the list.
3. Po
TSa wrote:
>
> The view I believe Yuval is harboring is the one examplified
> in movies like The Matrix or The 13th Floor and that underlies
> the holodeck of the Enterprise: you can leave the intrinsic
> causality of the running program and inspect it. Usually that
> is called debugging. But this
Yuval Kogman wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 29, 2005 at 13:52:54 -0400, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
>
[Bunches of stuff elided.]
>>A million years ago, $Larry pointed out that when we were able to use
>>'is just a' classifications on P6 concepts, it indicated that we were
>>making good forward progress. In t
14 matches
Mail list logo
