Aaron Sherman wrote:
(updated based on followup conversations)
Proposal: A sigil followed by [...] is always a composer for that type.
%[...]- Hash.
@[...]- Array.
&[...]- Code.
|[...]- Capture. Identical to \(...).
$[...]- Scalar. Like item(...), but fo
Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 10/5/06, Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Proposal: A sigil followed by [...] is always a composer for that type.
%[...] - Hash. Unicode: ⦃...⦄
@[...] - Array. Unicode: [...]
? - Seq. Unicode: ⎣...⎤
&[...] - Code. Unicode:
On 10/5/06, Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Proposal: A sigil followed by [...] is always a composer for that type.
%[...] - Hash. Unicode: ⦃...⦄
@[...] - Array. Unicode: [...]
? - Seq. Unicode: ⎣...⎤
&[...] - Code. Unicode: ⦕...⦖
|[...]
Aaron Sherman wrote:
Proposal: A sigil followed by [...] is always a composer for that type.
%[...]- Hash. Unicode: ⦃...⦄
@[...]- Array. Unicode: [...]
...
I left out ::, which is probably a mistake. Part of the elegance of
this, IMHO, is that it behaves the same for all sig
Jonathan Lang wrote:
What if I import two modules, both of which export a 'foo' method?
That's always fine unless they have exactly the same signature. In
general, that's not going to happen because the first parameter is
created from the invocant. Thus:
use HTML4;
use Math:
S04 now reads:
==
However, a hash composer may never occur at the end of a line. If the
parser sees anything that looks like a hash composer at the end of
the line, it fails with "closing hash curly may not terminate line"
or some such.
my $hash = {
1 => { 2 => 3, 4 => 5 },
What if I import two modules, both of which export a 'foo' method?
IMHO, it would be nice if this sort of situation was resolved in a
manner similar to how role composition occurs: call such a conflict a
fatal error, and provide an easy technique for eliminating such
conflicts. One such techniqu
chromatic wrote:
jesse wrote:
> Ok. So, I think what you're saying is that it's not a matter of "don't let
> people write libraries that add strictures to code that uses those modules"
> but a matter of "perl should always give you enough rope to turn off any
> stricture imposed on you by externa
S04 says:
A line ending with a closing brace "}", followed by nothing but whitespace or
comments, will terminate a statement if an end of statement can occur there.
That is, these two statements are equivalent:
my $x = sub { 3 }
my $x = sub { 3 };
Does this mean that
if $foo == 123 {
Author: larry
Date: Thu Oct 5 11:42:26 2006
New Revision: 12737
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
Log:
"Bad dates..."
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
==
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod(original)
Author: larry
Date: Thu Oct 5 11:16:58 2006
New Revision: 12736
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
Log:
Removed hash composers from line-ending curly rule entirely. Now a parsefail.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
=
HaloO,
Larry Wall wrote:
Basically, all types do Package whenever they need an associated
namespace.
Great! This is how I imagined things to be. And the reason why
the :: sigil is also the separator of namespaces.
And most of the Package role is simply:
method postfix:<::> () { return
HaloO,
Brad Bowman wrote:
Sam Vilain wrote:
This will be the same as requiring that a class implements a
method, except the method's name is infix:<==>(::T $self: T $other)
or some such.
Sure. The point is, how does a role designer mix in the x and y
coordinate attributes *and* augment the no
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 01:04:45PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 October 2006 12:48, jesse wrote:
>
> > Ok. So, I think what you're saying is that it's not a matter of "don't let
> > people write libraries that add strictures to code that uses those modules"
> > but a matter of "per
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 12:43:04PM -0700, chromatic wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 October 2006 12:09, jesse wrote:
>
> > Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "person writing the
> > program" and "person writing the libraries." In fact, I've _gotta_
> > be. I'd like to be able to put my str
15 matches
Mail list logo
