Author: larry
Date: Mon May 8 17:26:05 2006
New Revision: 9139
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
Log:
Clarification of the 0,1,Inf parsing policy.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S02.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/
Author: larry
Date: Mon May 8 16:50:55 2006
New Revision: 9138
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
Supplied missing specs for tiebreaking semantics of "longer" names.
As a bonus, supplied conjectural syntax for return type tiebreaking.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 05:30:23PM +0300, Gaal Yahas wrote:
: We have a very nifty reduce metaoperator. Scans are a counterpart of
: reduce that are very useful -- they are the (preferably lazy) list of
: consecutive accumulated reductions up to the final result. But I can't
: think of a convenient
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 12:34:26PM +0200, Dr.Ruud wrote:
: What would be the way to define-or-set that a specific hash has
: non-case-sensitive keys?
Use a shaped hash with a key type that defines infix:<===> appropriately,
since object hashes are based on infix:<===> rather than infix:.
: Or bro
David K Storrs wrote:
Hmmm...This doesn't seem to have particularly grabbed the popular
imagination among the Perl6 crowd.
Well, I think it's the Perl5 crowd that is in much more need
of having its imagination grabbed. :-)
[big snip]
Anyway, I very much like your ideas. (And Juerd's suggesti
David K Storrs wrote:
Hmmm...This doesn't seem to have particularly grabbed the popular
imagination among the Perl6 crowd.
Well, I think it's the Perl5 crowd that is in much more need
of having its imagination grabbed. :-)
[big snip]
Anyway, I very much like your ideas. (And Juerd's suggesti
David K Storrs wrote:
Hmmm...This doesn't seem to have particularly grabbed the popular
imagination among the Perl6 crowd.
Well, I think it's the Perl5 crowd that is in much more need
of having its imagination grabbed. :-)
[big snip]
Anyway, I very much like your ideas. (And Juerd's suggesti
TSa schreef:
> Dr.Ruud:
>> What would be the way to define-or-set that a specific hash has
>> non-case-sensitive keys?
>
> There are two things in this:
> (1) The syntax to type the keys of a hash---too bad that I forgot it
> and currently don't find it in the Synopsyses. Pointers welcome!
TSa writes:
> Dr.Ruud wrote:
>
> > What would be the way to define-or-set that a specific hash has
> > non-case-sensitive keys?
>
> (2) A way to constrain a string to be case insensitive.
>
> subset CaseInsensitive of Str where { .lc eq .uc }
>
> but it actually is a constraint on the &infi
HaloO,
Dr.Ruud wrote:
What would be the way to define-or-set that a specific hash has
non-case-sensitive keys?
There are two things in this:
(1) The syntax to type the keys of a hash---too bad that I forgot it
and currently don't find it in the Synopsyses. Pointers welcome!
(2) A way to
Gaal Yahas skribis 2006-05-08 17:58 (+0300):
> (Is there special sugar to make @input be the last index when used in a
> range, or did you mean ..^ ?)
I meant @input.last, or probably @input.indices (or .keys?) instead of
the entire range, and @input.first instead of the first 0.
Juerd
--
http:
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 04:44:51PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
> To make sure I understand what you mean, not as a proposed
> implementation:
>
> my @input = (...);
> my @scan = map { [op] @input[0..$_] } [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>
> Is this what you mean?
>
> Hm, could that be written as:
>
> my
Gaal Yahas skribis 2006-05-08 17:30 (+0300):
> We have a very nifty reduce metaoperator. Scans are a counterpart of
> reduce that are very useful -- they are the (preferably lazy) list of
> consecutive accumulated reductions up to the final result. But I can't
> think of a convenient way of express
We have a very nifty reduce metaoperator. Scans are a counterpart of
reduce that are very useful -- they are the (preferably lazy) list of
consecutive accumulated reductions up to the final result. But I can't
think of a convenient way of expressing scans in Perl 6.
I'm probably not thinking hard
What would be the way to define-or-set that a specific hash has
non-case-sensitive keys?
Or broader: that the keys should be normalized (think NFKC()) before
usage?
Would it be easy to "delegate it to the hash"? (or use a hardly
noticeable wrapper)
--
Affijn, Ruud
"Gewoon is een tijger."
15 matches
Mail list logo
