Why bother, actually, when it can just be a lazy list... Opendir and
closedir are very oldschool, and can be retained for whatever
technical detail they are needed, but in most modern code I think
that:
for readdir($dir_name) { .say }
should work as well.
The act of opening a directory i
> "JL" == Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JL> Well, I did suggest that "openfile" and "opendir" exist alongside
JL> "open", with "openfile" being more akin to Perl 5's "open" or
JL> "sysopen", and "open" being a bit more dwimmy.
JL> But in general, most of the differences th
Uri Guttman wrote:
> "JL" == Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JL> Please. I've always found the "opendir ... readdir ... closedir" set
JL> to be clunky.
JL> Also: why distinguish between "open" and "opendir"? If the string is
JL> the name of a file, 'open' means "open th
> "JL" == Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JL> Please. I've always found the "opendir ... readdir ... closedir" set
JL> to be clunky.
JL> Also: why distinguish between "open" and "opendir"? If the string is
JL> the name of a file, 'open' means "open the file"; if it is the
Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:
Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Also: why distinguish between "open" and "opendir"? If the string is
> the name of a file, 'open' means "open the file"; if it is the name of
> a directory, 'open' means "open the directory". If it's the name of a
> pipe, it opens the pipe. And
On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 19:00 -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
> Please. I've always found the "opendir ... readdir ... closedir" set
> to be clunky.
>
> Also: why distinguish between "open" and "opendir"? If the string is
> the name of a file, 'open' means "open the file"; if it is the name of
> a dir
brian d foy wrote:
As I was playing around with dirhandles, I thought "What if..." (which
is actualy sorta fun to do in Pugs, where Perl 5 has everything
documented somewhere even if nobody has read it).
My goal is modest: explain fewer things in the Llama. If dirhandles
were like filehandles, t
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 13 17:59:55 2007
New Revision: 14374
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S12.pod
Log:
Eliminated STATUS in favor of normal dispatch to :foo pair-handling methods.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
===
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Luke
Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, now we have stat($file).size.
That's sorta fine with me. That makes it even easier to explain to
newbies, although I'd need method names for the other tests.
However, junctive tests are a mighty attractive featur
As I was playing around with dirhandles, I thought "What if..." (which
is actualy sorta fun to do in Pugs, where Perl 5 has everything
documented somewhere even if nobody has read it).
My goal is modest: explain fewer things in the Llama. If dirhandles
were like filehandles, there's a couple of pa
On Apr 13, 2007, at 20:09 , Jonathan Lang wrote:
What does pair notation buy us that quoted-postfix notation doesn't
already cover?
I don't think it does. What it does buy is that the *unquoted*
notation works: the definition of Perl6's grammar turns out to lead
to `-f' and `- f' parsin
Luke Palmer wrote:
These things are methods, and I'm not sure why we've crammed them into
smart match. Things like :M have nothing to do with matching. What
would it mean if smart match returned false? "This file has not been
modified ever"? :e has a bit more merit for a smart match, but the
op
On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 11:07:12PM -0700, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Generalize the negated relational operators to apply to any infix
: operator that returns a boolean. In terms of the standard operators,
: this will add <&& || ^^ // and or xor err> to the family that is
: implicitly equipped with lo
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 13 16:23:17 2007
New Revision: 14373
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
Ranges over enums and such also can use *, suggested by Jonathan Lang++
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
On 4/13/07, brian d foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Which then makes me think I'd want to do something a bit wacky to see
if the modtime is greater than 5:
"doc" ~~ M => any( 5 ..* );
Or even "doc" ~~ M => (5..*). Then again, ("doc" ~~ :M) ~~ 5..* does
the same thing, without having to hav
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark J.
Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I need to reread the docs. What's the colon in the method calls for?
>
> (That is, why is it $stat_obj.:r instead of just $stat_obj.r ?)
I can't answer the "why" question, but the stuff in S02 might help you.
Look
So far (eep!), the documentation talks about file test operators as
working with pairs, which will be a weird thing to explain, I guess.
I'm wondering if this matters to the mere user at all, and if we should
even talk about them in terms of "pairs". I don't want a different set
of terms in the doc
I think I need to reread the docs. What's the colon in the method calls for?
(That is, why is it $stat_obj.:r instead of just $stat_obj.r ?)
On 4/13/07, brian d foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Larry Wall
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 01:52
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Larry Wall
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 01:52:50PM -0500, brian d foy wrote:
> : Here's my code example that motivates this question. For a Llama6
> : exercise with file test operators, I wanted to create a little table:
> :
> :for @fil
On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 01:52:50PM -0500, brian d foy wrote:
: At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
: false do, but the true is the filename.
You've just dug up a pugsian fossil.
: I expected a boolean, for no
: other reason than Perl 6 has them so it might as wel
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 08:01:13PM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
: Maybe there also needs to be a "boolean" conversion for printf
: (perhaps %t for true?):
Seems insufficiently general. However, I note that booleans are
an enum, and by default stringify to Bool::True or Bool::False.
Maybe %t stands
Author: larry
Date: Fri Apr 13 10:02:01 2007
New Revision: 14372
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
Log:
Clarification of simplified return values of filetests for brian.d.foy++.
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
==
on 4/13/2007 4:55 AM brian d foy said the following:
> Shouldn't $*ARGS still show up as the P6 counterpart to ARGV?
> S*ARGS as the filehandle shows up in S04.
Yup. Fixed now in S28draft.pod. Mention in Variable.pod will follow.
dvergin
On Apr 13, 2007, at 9:04 , brian d foy wrote:
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brandon
S. Allbery KF8NH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
File tests are supposed to return something which:
- behaves as a Bool
- stringifies as a filename
- numifies as a file size or as a time, if appropriate
- propag
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Moritz Lenz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> brian d foy wrote:
> > At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
> > false do, but the true is the filename.
>
> that helps chaining of file test:
>
> $fn ~~ :t ~~ :x
> or something.
I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Moritz Lenz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> brian d foy wrote:
> > At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
> > false do, but the true is the filename.
> that helps chaining of file test:
>
> $fn ~~ :t ~~ :x
> or something.
That's fine,
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brandon
S. Allbery KF8NH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> File tests are supposed to return something which:
> - behaves as a Bool
> - stringifies as a filename
> - numifies as a file size or as a time, if appropriate
> - propagates a stat object (obviating perl5's mag
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brandon
S. Allbery KF8NH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Apr 12, 2007, at 14:52 , brian d foy wrote:
>
> > At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
> > false do, but the true is the filename. I expected a boolean, for no
> > other reaso
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Vergin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> on 4/11/2007 10:29 AM brian d foy said the following:
> > The $*ARGS variable shows up in this file, which looks like it's still
> > maintained:
> > http://svn.pugscode.org/pugs/docs/AES/S28draft.pod
>
> That's a typ
On Apr 12, 2007, at 14:52 , brian d foy wrote:
At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
false do, but the true is the filename. I expected a boolean, for no
other reason than Perl 6 has them so it might as well use them.
This is documented somewhere already. Pugs
On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 10:29:43AM +0100, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> brian d foy wrote:
> > At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
> > false do, but the true is the filename.
>
> that helps chaining of file test:
>
> $fn ~~ :t ~~ :x
> or something.
> If you want
Version 0.0.3 of the Perl6::Perldoc suite is now on CPAN.
I've ripped out the previous, extremely brittle, test suite and replaced it
with a much larger one whose tests are fully abstracted, declarative, and OO
(and hence may be useful to other Perl 6 implementors as well). The new tests
don't
on 4/11/2007 10:29 AM brian d foy said the following:
The $*ARGS variable shows up in this file, which looks like it's still
maintained:
http://svn.pugscode.org/pugs/docs/AES/S28draft.pod
That's a typo (mine). It should be @*ARGS and refers to simple access to
the command line arguments
Damian Conway skribis 2007-04-13 20:01 (+1000):
> Maybe there also needs to be a "boolean" conversion for printf
> (perhaps %t for true?):
I often use "[ ]" and "[X]" to represent true and false in text output.
They resemble checkboxes. I don't think printf needs a boolean output
template, but it
On 13/04/07, Moritz Lenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If you want a boolean, use
? $fn ~~ :x
or something.
Definitely "or something". Unary ? has the wrong precedence there.
You could write:
for @files -> $file {
printf "%-70s %s %s %s\n",
$file,
true $file ~~
Hi,
brian d foy wrote:
> At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
> false do, but the true is the filename.
that helps chaining of file test:
$fn ~~ :t ~~ :x
or something.
If you want a boolean, use
? $fn ~~ :x
or something.
HTH,
Moritz
--
Moritz Lenz
http://morit
At the moment the file test operators that I expect to return true or
false do, but the true is the filename. I expected a boolean, for no
other reason than Perl 6 has them so it might as well use them. The
section on Smart Matching in S03 says that the ~~ doesn't have to
return a boolean, but asi
37 matches
Mail list logo
