Stevan Little wrote:
> Yes, that is correct, because:
>
> Dog.isa(Dog) # true
> $spot.isa(Dog) # true
> ^Dog.isa(Dog) # false
>
> In fact ^Dog isa MetaClass (or Class whatever you want to call it).
>
> At least that is how I see/understand it.
OK. To help me get a better idea about what's goin
On 2/8/06, Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consider "my Dog $spot". From the Perl6-to-English Dictionary:
> Dog: a dog.
> $spot: the dog that is named Spot.
> ^Dog: the concept of a dog.
>
> Am I understanding things correctly?
>
> If so, here's what I'd expect: a dog can bark, or
At 21:30 +0100 2/8/06, Juerd wrote:
>Larry Wall skribis 2006-02-08 8:38 (-0800):
> > It would be nice to have other data points
In the Macintosh world:
1) say is a reserved word in AppleScript that sends text to a speaker (with
windings and a cone).
2) We are forever mucking with $/ and $\ se
-- Original message --
From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On 2/7/06, Robin Houston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Any undef undefinedmatch if !defined $a
> > Any Regex pattern matchmatch if $a =~ /$b/
> >
Consider "my Dog $spot". From the Perl6-to-English Dictionary:
Dog: a dog.
$spot: the dog that is named Spot.
^Dog: the concept of a dog.
Am I understanding things correctly?
If so, here's what I'd expect: a dog can bark, or Spot can bark; but
the concept of a dog cannot bark:
can Dog "b
Luke wrote:
> My interpretation (which may be totally off, as I don't have any
> confirmation that anybody else is thinking the same way I am) is that
> the synopsis is wrong, and commutivity of ~~ is a happy coincidence
> wherever it exists. The way I've been thinking about ~~ is just as
> the f
On 2/7/06, Robin Houston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Any undef undefinedmatch if !defined $a
> Any Regex pattern matchmatch if $a =~ /$b/
> Code() Code()results are equalmatch if $a->() eq $b->()
> Any Code()simple cl
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 23:55, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> Does this imply that we should think up this process?
Go ahead.
> If I propose a concrete plan for the implementation of Perl 6 in a
> layered fashion it will probably be even more overlooked.
>
> I have no authority, and this is not somet
Larry Wall skribis 2006-02-08 8:38 (-0800):
> It would be nice to have other data points
I associate "say" with to-human communication, and there, I don't
generally have records. Without records, no ORS.
However, while I think that &say should not be
&print.assuming(:ors("\n")), it shouldn't be
On 2/8/06, Larry Wall wrote:
> From: Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I've now been using C (via Perl6::Say) for some time -- testing our
collective intuition on this -- and it turns out that b. isn't the least
surprising. At least, not to me. In fact, I am regularly (and annoyingly)
>
One more data point?
I might want a newline or I might want an ORS. The former, say()
gives me. The latter, print() provides.
I cannot imagine ever wanting a mixture of those, and if I ever do,
I expect I'll prefer to say what I mean:
# modulo syntax:
{ temp ORS //= "\n"; print @args
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 08:38:32AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> The question basically boils down to how you think about "say".
> Damian's argument is that, if people are like him, they will learn
> it as "print plus newline" rather than as "emit a whole record".
> I'm inclined to think that people d
IMHO, people who set $/ are, by definition, saying that they expect
lines to terminate with something other than a newline; they should
expect 'say' to conform to their wishes. I don't like the notion of
perl second-guessing the programmer's intentions here; "Do what I
mean, not what I say" only c
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 07:32:18PM -0500, Stevan Little wrote:
: On 2/7/06, Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > Stevan~
: >
: > I am going to assume that you intended to reply to perl 6 language,
: > and thus will include your post in its entirety in my response.
:
: Yes, sorry... I missed
On Tue, Feb 07, 2006 at 06:38:14PM +, Robin Houston wrote:
: Late last year I implemented a few Perl 6 features in Perl 5.
: A couple of things have emerged that may be relevant to the
: Perl 6 design. Certainly they're things that I'm curious about.
: I'll send the other one in a separate mess
Stevan~
On 2/7/06, Stevan Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > After all Foo is just a specific instance of the class Class.
>
> Shhh... class objects don't exist ... I was never here,... I will I
> count to three and when I snap my fingers you will awaken and will
> have forgotten all about cl
Yuval Kogman wrote:
> What I do think is that there is something in the middle of these
> two big questions, and they are:
>
> * How will the Perl 6 compiler be designed (parts, etc)
That... was what Pugs Apocrypha was meant to contain, with PA02 being a
design overview, and PA03 onward doc
I'd like to have a crack at rephrasing this, since everyone but
stevan seems to be getting the wrong impression.
Perl 6 has some hard to answer questions. The questions the
community has answered so far are:
* How the VM will work/look
* What the syntax/feature requirements are
I
18 matches
Mail list logo
