Re: Closure vs Hash Parsing

Jonathan (>): > That this means the { $_ => uc $_; } above would end up composing a Hash > object (unless the semicolon is meant to throw a spanner in the > hash-composer works?) It says you can use sub to disambiguate, but > > %ret = map sub { $_ => uc $_; }, split "", $text; > > Doesn't work sinc

Re: Another adverb on operator question

Perhaps I'm missing something; but why couldn't you say '[lt]:lc $a, $b, $c'? That is, I see the "reducing meta-operator" as a way of taking a list-associative infix operator and treating it as a function call, albeit one with a funny name. As such, you should be able to do things with a reduced

Re: Another adverb on operator question

On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 05:04:41AM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote: > What about adverbs on reduction operators? > > [lt :lc] $a,$b,$c # all in decreasing order I don't think that'll fly because reduce operators are parsed as single tokens to disambiguate them from array composers, and there a

Closure vs Hash Parsing

Hi, There is in the spectests this example: my $text = "abc"; my %ret; %ret = map { $_ => uc $_; }, split "", $text; is ~%ret.kv, "a A b B c C", "=> works in a map block"; However, it seems from S06: "|{...}| is always a block. However, if it is completely empty or consists of a single list,

Re: adverbs o operators

HaloO, Larry Wall wrote: The whitespace proposal is essentially to require whitespace between any operator any following pair if the pair is intended to be a noun and not an adverb. So, then my log:base(2) would still look for the positional argument, right? Alternately, we could force eve

Re: adverbs o operators

On Thu, Aug 07, 2008 at 06:15:07PM +0200, TSa wrote: >> Do you write >> >> $a lt:lc $b le:lc $c > > I think that works and looks best. My favorite hope is that > >$x = log:2 $y; > > flies, as well. > >$x = log:base(2) $y; > > is a bit lengthy and > >$x = log $y, :base(2); > > looks

Re: new article, "A Romp Through Infinity"

HaloO, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's just make sure we're handling inf and -inf right and leave all that other stuff until later. The point is: what is the minimum we need to be future proof and compatible to other language features. Regards, TSa. -- "The unavoidable price of reliability i

Re: adverbs o operators

HaloO, John M. Dlugosz wrote: So do they have to go at the end of the whole expression in the current grammar? I don't follow about the spaces. The problem is term versus operator parsing. Do you write $a lt:lc $b le:lc $c I think that works and looks best. My favorite hope is that

Re: new article, "A Romp Through Infinity"

HaloO, Xavier Noria wrote: IMO to include something related to infinity you need to stick with some particular model and forget the rest. Well spoken. But I think that the model John has chosen is a bit too restrictive. If a type has a notion of Zero it could have a similar notion of infinity

Re: new article, "A Romp Through Infinity"

Supporting multiple levels of infinities, transfinite numbers or even Surreal Numbers should be considered in the same category of features as returning multiple answers from complex trig functions. They're an interesting thing to discuss and experiment with but shouldn't distract form getting

windows XP copyfile

I'm trying to do a Perl script (PC has Perl5 installed) in a BAT file which will open the CMD prompt, interact with the user and copy files from one location to other directories. Does anyone know how to "dir" the files in a directory into an array and sort by date and return the ones within the p

Re: Humorous but serious article

Hi >See my latest creation at A "modern" decendent of APL is J http://www.jsoftware.com/ http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/FrontPage Regards, Todd Olson

Re: Humorous but serious article

HaloO, John M. Dlugosz wrote: See my latest creation at Nice write-up! You say that there's no syntax for refering to a multi as a whole. But is that not simply the short name? E.g. infix:<+> is the multi of all targets in a scope. You need infix:<+>

Re: new article, "A Romp Through Infinity"

HaloO, John M. Dlugosz wrote: The proposed Infinite class (see the thread I started on 4/25/2008) does handle transfinite cardinals. Do you mean the thread called "The Inf type" where I replied to your post of a version of your specdoc? My concern with the approach you take there is to base it

Re: new article, "A Romp Through Infinity"

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 3:19 PM, John M. Dlugosz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure. A quick reading indicates that ⋆ℝ contains "infinitely large" > numbers that maintain the properties of addition, but that is not the same > as "infinity". Well *R is a field that has infinitely large and

Re: new article, "A Romp Through Infinity"

TSa Thomas.Sandlass-at-barco.com |Perl 6| wrote: As I recall, it can handle the concept of Inf-1 etc. Yes. But the Hyperreals do the same and stay within the realm of set theory. I'm not sure. A quick reading indicates that ⋆ℝ contains "infinitely large" numbers that maintain the properti

S29 - Time

Hi, S29 says: "Returns a |Time| object. There are a number of uses for this object, all of which can be found in the documentation for |Time|." However, I don't see that documentation in S29, and have taken a browse around the Pugs repository and don't see any sign of it there either. Am I

Another adverb on operator question

What about adverbs on reduction operators? [lt :lc] $a,$b,$c # all in decreasing order --John

Humorous but serious article

See my latest creation at

Re: adverbs o operators

Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote: > As for > marking each op individually, it might be possible if we add a > whitespace dependency between "lt:lc" and "lt :lc", but 1 ..:by(2) 100 > is pretty ugly. > > Larry So do they have to go at the end of the whole expression in the current gram