The fact that you'll be able to do that in Perl6 excites me. One of the
things I use with the existing Perl5 unfortunately at times, is
commercial software which compiles Perl code into various Microsoft
formats: services, system tray icons, dll's and executables.
That proved to be extremely va
On 6/22/07, Smylers wrote:
David Green writes:
Well, clutter like "Blah: none" seems to me to be more the fault of
the doc-formatter for not hiding lines like that.
It's more the repetition in the lines you snipped that I really object to:
Ah. (That was sneaky of me.) I agree with that --
OK. After much thinking on the subject, here are my recommendations:
First: give Pod the ability to delimit blocks of ambient text, e.g.:
=text
class Foo {
has $bar;
}
=stop
'=text' and '=stop' would be considered to be separate but related
single-line Pod Sections, so Pod-stripping uti
On 6/22/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Friday 22 June 2007 11:07:35 Chas Owens wrote:
> Please, god, no. Or at least make two distributions: Bare Perl 6 and
> Perl 6. Many companies have a "Only Core Perl" policy. They refuse
> to install CPAN modules because "We don't trust them".
On Friday 22 June 2007 11:07:35 Chas Owens wrote:
> Please, god, no. Or at least make two distributions: Bare Perl 6 and
> Perl 6. Many companies have a "Only Core Perl" policy. They refuse
> to install CPAN modules because "We don't trust them".
I think of this the same way I think of "Do not
On 6/22/07, jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/22/07, Chas Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Most of the time the policy is enacted by lower-case-l lazy sysadmins
> who can't be bothered to type
>
> perl -MCPAN -e install Foo::Bar
>
> My normal route around them is to install the module i
On 6/22/07, Chas Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Most of the time the policy is enacted by lower-case-l lazy sysadmins
who can't be bothered to type
perl -MCPAN -e install Foo::Bar
My normal route around them is to install the module into the home
directory of the user who is going to run the
On 6/22/07, Daniel Hulme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 02:07:35PM -0400, Chas Owens wrote:
> On 6/22/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I also like to proceed from the assumption that the only core modules
> >should be those required to install other modules.
> Plea
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 02:07:35PM -0400, Chas Owens wrote:
> On 6/22/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I also like to proceed from the assumption that the only core modules
> >should be those required to install other modules.
> Please, god, no. Or at least make two distributions: Bar
On 6/22/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Thursday 21 June 2007 15:23:38 Smylers wrote:
> Has Larry yet decreed whether Web will be bundled with Perl 6?
I also like to proceed from the assumption that the only core modules should
be those required to install other modules.
-- c
Pl
On Thursday 21 June 2007 15:23:38 Smylers wrote:
> Has Larry yet decreed whether Web will be bundled with Perl 6?
I also like to proceed from the assumption that the only core modules should
be those required to install other modules.
-- c
I have a feeling we've sorta assumed some use cases for whatever Pod
design we're advocating, so I thought I'd write down what I'd like to
do with Pod. At this level, I don't care how it gets done, which model
it uses, or anything else.
This isn't a fantasy wishlist of anything I think I might wan
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Smylers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Juerd Waalboer writes:
>
> > Smylers skribis 2007-06-21 21:33 (+0100):
> >
> > > I disagree. perldoc.perl.org was started by JJ, gained popularity,
> > > and then got awarded the official blessing of the onion. Over the
> > >
On 6/22/07, Mark Overmeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
snip
* Jonathan Lang ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070622 10:41]:
snip
> Please forgive my ignorance: what does "AST" stand for?
The Abstract Syntax Tree, the result of the code parser, un-interpreted.
snip
You mean it isn't Andrew S. Tanenbaum? W
Daniel Hulme writes:
> On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 03:40:37PM +0100, Aaron Crane wrote:
> > my $b = 1 && 0 || 42;
> > # Now $b is 17
> s/17/42/ or vice-versa, I think.
Uh, yes. Serves me right for trying to change metasyntactic numbers
midstream.
--
Aaron Crane
On Fri, Jun 22, 2007 at 03:40:37PM +0100, Aaron Crane wrote:
> my $b = 1 && 0 || 42;
> # Now $b is 17
s/17/42/ or vice-versa, I think.
--
Paraphernalia/Never hides your broken bones,/ And I don't know why you'd
want to try:/ It's plain to see you're on your own.-- Paul Simon
http://s
Damian Conway wrote:
> You gave the hint that comments are also in the parse tree.
They can be. Better still, the (raw) Pod can also be kept in the parse
tree...since, like comments, the Perl parser still has to recognize it, even
when it's focusing on extracting Perl.
...And since the Perl p
Peter Scott writes:
> can someone tell me why you can't just use && ... || in place of ??
> ... !!, now that && and || propagate context to both sides?
You get the wrong result when the antecedent is true and the consequent is
false:
my $a = 1 ?? 0 !! 42;
# Now $a is 0
my $b = 1 && 0 || 42
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 06:20:49 +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
> The mandatory else-part is one of the most valuable features of
> the ternary operator. It helps ensure that variables initialized with a
> cascaded ternary actually do get initialized
Notwithstanding the above argument, can someone tell
Mark Overmeer wrote:
>> Would the following syntax suffice?
>>
>>method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
>>=PURPOSE Check weather the postal code confirms to the standards
>>=ARG $postalcode
>>a string with blanks trimmed.
>>=RETURN
>>the stri
Mark Overmeer wrote:
IMO, POD6 should not provide the possibility to build such tools: it
should *be* the tool. With a nice (compact) standard definition how
to document each of the designed features in Perl6
And this is a succinct statement of one half of our fundamental philosophical
differ
> >> Mark Overmeer wrote:
> >> >Then, when you want to add some docs to the method, to help the
> >> >correct use, add it, for instance like:
> >> >
> >> > method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
> >> > ` Check wether the postal code confirms to the standards
> >* Damian
Mark Overmeer wrote:
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070622 09:02]:
> Mark Overmeer wrote:
> >Then, when you want to add some docs to the method, to help the
> >correct use, add it, for instance like:
> >
> > method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
> > ` Check wethe
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070622 08:38]:
> And, no, I don't consider the pointers to your excellent module to be
> suitable specific examples of what we're not giving you...mainly because I
> believe that the Pod 6 documentation language I've designed (in conjunction
> with the abilit
* Moritz Lenz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070622 09:16]:
> Damian Conway wrote:
> > Would the following syntax suffice?
> >
> > method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
> > =PURPOSE Check weather the postal code confirms to the standards
> > =ARG $postalcode
> > a
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070622 09:02]:
> Mark Overmeer wrote:
> >Then, when you want to add some docs to the method, to help the
> >correct use, add it, for instance like:
> >
> > method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
> > ` Check wether the postal code confi
Damian Conway wrote:
> Mark Overmeer wrote:
> Would the following syntax suffice?
>
> method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
> =PURPOSE Check weather the postal code confirms to the standards
> =ARG $postalcode
> a string with blanks trimmed.
> =RETUR
David Green writes:
> Well, clutter like "Blah: none" seems to me to be more the fault of
> the doc-formatter for not hiding lines like that.
It's more the repetition in the lines you snipped that I really object
to: given the function's name, the name(s) of its parameter(s), and the
short descri
Darren Duncan writes:
> At 11:23 PM +0100 6/21/07, Smylers wrote:
>
> > Has Larry yet decreed whether Web will be bundled with Perl 6?
>
> I believe that what Larry has said is that there are no official core
> modules, ... So ... not something to worry about now.
Thanks for that, Darren.
Smyl
Juerd Waalboer writes:
> Smylers skribis 2007-06-21 23:23 (+0100):
>
> > Of course. But there's a big difference between the attitude of
> > 'let's do the best we can right now' and 'this is our one chance to
> > do this right'.
>
> I think that for some things, mainly for setting community sta
Mark Overmeer wrote:
Then, when you want to add some docs to the method, to help the
correct use, add it, for instance like:
method isValidPostalCode(str $postalcode) returns bool {...}
` Check wether the postal code confirms to the standards
`$postalcode: a string with blanks trimm
I fully agree with David's response to this mail. The only
thing I would like to add:
* Smylers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 18:02]:
> [*0] Consider a function C. I'd document it along
> the lines of:
>
> valid_postcode
>
> Returns whether the specified postcode is valid, for ex
Mark Overmeer wrote:
You may remember that I repeatedly asked @Larry not to forget the
documentation aspect in the redesign of Perl, in person during various
YAPCs and Workshops. Then, when you finally took the challenge, I have
send you a extensive email showing various alternative syntaxes fo
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 08:07]:
> Mark Overmeer wrote:
> [...yet another honest and heartfelt plea for Pod 6 to be something
> entirely different from what it is currently designed to be.]
> The solution is simple, you know, Mark. Why not just write up your own
> alternate S26,
Mark Overmeer sought to clarify:
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 23:54]:
Yes. I completely agree that such a tool not be standard and universally
Do you mean "must be" i.s.o. "not be"?
Oops. Indeed. Can't even claim it must have been a Freudian slip, since I
really *do* believe
> Juerd wrote:
>> This dedicated OO documentation must be core, because Perl itself is
>> heavily OO.
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 23:54]:
> Yes. I completely agree that such a tool not be standard and universally
Do you mean "must be" i.s.o. "not be"?
> available. Just as the p
* Smylers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 20:33]:
> Documentation, unlike code, doesn't have to be backwards compatible: if
> Perl 6.0.1 changes the API of a standard function that will break
> existing code; but if Perl 6.0.1 has documentation with a different
> structure from Perl 6.0.0, that won't b
37 matches
Mail list logo
