On Tue, Dec 27, 2005 at 12:10:45AM -0500, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Creating an array whose positions are aliases for positions in another
: array can be useful. How about
:
: my @s := @a[0,2,4] is alias;
:
: @a[2] = 3; # @s[1] == 3
: @s[1] = 4; # @a[2] == 4
:
: The default slicing behavio
On 12/22/05, Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 04:47:21PM +0100, Michele Dondi wrote:
> > Also I wonder if one will be able to push(), pop(), etc. array slices as
> > well whole arrays. A' la
> >
> > my @a=qw/aa bb cc dd ee/;
> > my $s=pop @a[0..2]; # or [0,2
On 12/26/05, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I argue that by the structure of that rule, you should be able to tell
> > which xs go with which y.
> > ...
> > Is there a counterargument that I'm not seeing?
>
> I'd say that if you want a structured rule, it should be written
> that
Hi all,
do we have any specifications for array introspection, or introspection
of data structures (including subroutines) in general? Say I have this
array:
my @array (1..9 --> Int);
I think I get the first bit with .shape; what about the Int? Since
arrays are glorified subroutines, per
> As a third possibility, could we huffman-code "do nothing" clauses by
> leaving out the appropriate argument? That is:
>
> while $x-- && some_condition($x);
That's a bit too short for my liking: it is likely to lead to the
traditional C undetectable bug when you write
while $x-- && some_cond
On Mon, Dec 26, 2005 at 07:34:06PM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
> On 12/26/05, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 02:09:19PM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > > "x" ~~ / [ [ (x) ]* ]* /
> >
> > As I understand things, $/[0][0] would be "x".
>
> Hmm, that seems w
On 12/26/05, Patrick R. Michaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 02:09:19PM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > "x" ~~ / [ [ (x) ]* ]* /
>
> As I understand things, $/[0][0] would be "x".
Hmm, that seems wrong. Consider:
"xxxyxxyxy" ~~ / [ [ (x) ]* (y) ]* /
I argue that by
On Fri, Dec 23, 2005 at 02:09:19PM +, Luke Palmer wrote:
> What sort of match object should this return, supposing that it didn't
> infinite loop:
>
> "x" ~~ / [ [ (x) ]* ]* /
>
> Should $/[0][0] be "x", or should $/[0][0][0] be "x"? If it's the
> latter, then when do new top-level eleme
