Author: larry
Date: Thu Jan 3 19:42:19 2008
New Revision: 14480
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
Typo from Smylers++
More clarification of assignment semantics in terms of underlying binding
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
==
Dave Whipp wrote:
I was reading Synopsis 4 with regards to multi core programming. It
seems to be infused with a bias towards non-parallel models of
computation. Concurrently appears to be an add-on feature -- whereas
we should have a mindset that explicit sequential constraints are the
add-on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Modified:
>doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
>
> Log:
> Clarification of autovivification semantics in terms of protoobjects
>
> -my $obj = [EMAIL PROTECTED]; # $obj is a Capture object - see S02
> +my $cap = [EMAIL PROTECTED]; # $obj is a Capture object - see
On Thu, Jan 03, 2008 at 08:55:24PM +0200, Gabor Szabo wrote:
: On Jan 3, 2008 6:36 PM, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 11:28:54AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: > : Paul Hodges wrote:
: > : > http://perl6.org/doc/design/syn/S02.html still says:
: > : > "Intra-line
Author: larry
Date: Thu Jan 3 16:15:39 2008
New Revision: 14479
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
Log:
Clarification of autovivification semantics in terms of protoobjects
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S09.pod
===
--- Jonathan Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Hodges wrote:
> > http://perl6.org/doc/design/syn/S02.html still says:
> > "Intra-line comments will not be supported in standard Perl"
>
> This is wrong, since S02 also defines intra-line comments, under
> "Whitespace and Comments". It calls
On 2008-01-03 Ovid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perl 5 couldn't really solve this and programmers just had to "know"
> that all methods were implicitly variadic. I seem to recall that
> Larry had an idea about how to specify a signature (I could be
> misremembering and I can't find the response).
just a small question, what speak against this construct:
$min, $max = @a.minmax;
On Jan 3, 2008 6:36 PM, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 11:28:54AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
> : Paul Hodges wrote:
> : > http://perl6.org/doc/design/syn/S02.html still says:
> : > "Intra-line comments will not be supported in standard Perl"
> Note that the docum
I don't know if this was considered a non-issue when I last raised it,
but in this synopsis:
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S12.html
I see that the behavior of .can() metamethod hasn't been updated. My
concern is that someone calls $object.can('bark') and they expect to
pass an integ
Moritz Lenz wrote:
You can achieve that with the "hyper" list-op (see S02).
Also note that an optimizer is free to automatically add the "hyper"
list op if it can prove that the executed block has no side effects.
Yes, there are some places where things are better than others, which is
why I
On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 11:28:54AM -0800, Jonathan Lang wrote:
: Paul Hodges wrote:
: > http://perl6.org/doc/design/syn/S02.html still says:
: > "Intra-line comments will not be supported in standard Perl"
:
: This is wrong, since S02 also defines intra-line comments, under
: "Whitespace and Comm
At 5:22 PM -0800 1/2/08, Dave Whipp wrote:
I was reading Synopsis 4 with regards to multi core programming. It
seems to be infused with a bias towards non-parallel models of
computation. Concurrently appears to be an add-on feature -- whereas
we should have a mindset that explicit sequential co
Dave Whipp wrote:
> I was reading Synopsis 4 with regards to multi core programming. It
> seems to be infused with a bias towards non-parallel models of
> computation. Concurrently appears to be an add-on feature -- whereas we
> should have a mindset that explicit sequential constraints are the
14 matches
Mail list logo
