Larry Wall wrote:
> You might have to write that
>
>@list ==> $foo.act :bar('baz');
>
> I think or the colon on the method would be taken as starting a list.
> I dunno, depends on whether .act: is considered a "longest token",
> I guess. I could argue it the other way as well, and :bar is a lo
One other point:
act $foo, @list, bar => 'baz';
is actually the same as:
act($foo, @list, bar => 'baz');
which might or might not dispatch to a method on $foo,
depending on whether (and how) &act is defined.
Jonathan probably meant:
act $foo: @list, bar => 'baz';
for the indirec
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:30:04PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > Jonathan Lang wrote:
: > : How do you define new adverbs, and how does a subroutine go about
: > : accessing them?
: >
: > Adverbs are just optional named parameters. Most of the magic is in
: > the call syntax.
Larry Wall wrote:
> Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : How do you define new adverbs, and how does a subroutine go about
> : accessing them?
>
> Adverbs are just optional named parameters. Most of the magic is in
> the call syntax.
Ah. So every part of a Capture Object has an alternate call syntax:
act
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 24 19:38:40 2006
New Revision: 8935
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Clarifications on adverbs.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 06:58:04PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: How do you define new adverbs, and how does a subroutine go about
: accessing them?
Adverbs are just optional named parameters. Most of the magic is in
the call syntax.
Larry
How do you define new adverbs, and how does a subroutine go about
accessing them?
--
Jonathan Lang
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:00:55AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: If you want to reset to before the key for some reason, you can always
: set .pos to $.beg, or whatever the name of the method is. Hmm,
: that looks like it's unspecced.
I'm wrong, it's already specced as .from and .to methods. So you
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 24 17:55:46 2006
New Revision: 8934
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
Log:
Random cleanup.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S05.pod(original)
On 4/24/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you want to reset to before the key for some reason, you can always
> set .pos to $.beg, or whatever the name of the method is. Hmm,
> that looks like it's unspecced.
>
BEGIN
.beg looks over-huffmanized to me. .begin is more natural to
english
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 05:22:25PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Why don't we just have work as an assertation, instead of having this
: strange "as if" thing?
'Cause the point of most parsing is to rapidly move on, not to rehash the
ground you already covered. And if you really do need to r
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 24 11:19:24 2006
New Revision: 8933
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Clarification requested by spinclad++.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S0
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:00:55AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:49:36AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> : But what if your subrule needs to know exactly which key matched or
> : needs to match the key again for some reason? The second passage says
> : that you may acces
Thanks, Scott & Larry.
IMHO, the explanation about and $ could be moved to where
the bare hash behaviour is explained as hash-in-angles-section already
says "A leading % matches like a bare hash except ..."
On 4/24/06, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you want to reset to before the ke
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 24 08:18:48 2006
New Revision: 8931
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
A postdeclaration may not change the syntax away from listop parsing rules.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
=
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:49:36AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: But what if your subrule needs to know exactly which key matched or
: needs to match the key again for some reason? The second passage says
: that you may access they actual text that matched with $ and you
: may again match the
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 04:50:43PM +0300, Markus Laire wrote:
> In Synopsis 5 (version 22),
>
> Under "Variable (non-)interpolation" it's said that
>
> An interpolated hash matches the longest possible key of the hash as a
> literal, or fails if no key matches. (A "" key will match anywhere,
> pr
In Synopsis 5 (version 22),
Under "Variable (non-)interpolation" it's said that
An interpolated hash matches the longest possible key of the hash as a
literal, or fails if no key matches. (A "" key will match anywhere,
provided no longer key matches.)
And under "Extensible metasyntax (<...>)" i
Author: larry
Date: Mon Apr 24 00:59:42 2006
New Revision: 8928
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Rules for parsing and compiling unrecognized identifiers.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==
--- doc/
19 matches
Mail list logo
