Re: Amazing Perl 6

· Quoth Larry: ˸ So let’s not make the mistake of thinking something ˸ longer is always less confusing or more official. ⋮ I already have too much problem with people thinking the ⋮ efficiency of a perl construct is related to its length. So you’re saying the Law of Parsimony has its uses… a̲n̲d

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 08:06:14PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote: > Mark J. Reed markjreed-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: >> >> So that much makes sense. But I still think the two different >> meanings of square brackets in operators are going to confuse people. >> >> >> > > I agree. The previous

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, 28 May 2009, John M. Dlugosz wrote: John Macdonald john-at-perlwolf.com |Perl 6| wrote: However, the assumption fails if "process" is supposed to mean that everyone is capable of generating Unicode in the messages that they are writing. I don't create non-English text often enough to h

r26957 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: wayland Date: 2009-05-29 04:53:24 +0200 (Fri, 29 May 2009) New Revision: 26957 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S22-package-format.pod Log: Actually named the components Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S22-package-format.pod === --- d

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

On Thu, 28 May 2009, Alex Elsayed wrote: On Thursday 28 May 2009 4:04:28 pm Daniel Carrera wrote: At first I liked wayland76's proposal, but now I have a new concern: Most package managers are not designed to hold multiple versions of the same package. As indicated in S11, it is important that

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote: Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 09:27 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote: Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 00:24 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: Please see

Re: Amazing Perl 6

John Macdonald john-at-perlwolf.com |Perl 6| wrote: However, the assumption fails if "process" is supposed to mean that everyone is capable of generating Unicode in the messages that they are writing. I don't create non-English text often enough to have it yet be useful to learn how. (I'd just

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Mark J. Reed markjreed-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: So that much makes sense. But I still think the two different meanings of square brackets in operators are going to confuse people. I agree. The previously quoted passages in the synopses are confusing, too, since it doesn't make the

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote: Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 00:24 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: Please see and talk to me about it. The illustratino is cool, but it doesn't take into account the possibility of: @a[0]

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

Larry Wall larry-at-wall.org |Perl 6| wrote: Basically, (ignoring STD's definition of name) I view @a[0] as a name, in the sense of identifying a unique object. It just happens to contain navigational elements like a URL. OK, that that might be what was meant in the synopses when it was penne

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

On Thursday 28 May 2009 4:54:50 pm Daniel Carrera wrote: > On the other hand, distributing Parrot bytecode (or PIR, or PASM) seems > fine. But I don't know what to suggest for modules that require a C > compiler. The problem with that is that Rakudo isn't the "Official" impelentation, and never wi

Re: The game of life

yary not.com-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: If anyone wants to try tackling this, a longer APL one-liner is referenced on the APL wikipedia page and discussed in length here: http://catpad.net/michael/apl/ As an aside, APL was the first computer language I was exposed to. When I was around 7 year

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

Larry Wall wrote: I support the notion of distributing binaries because nobody's gonna want to chew up their phone's battery doing unnecessary compiles. The ecology of computing devices is different from ten years ago. By binaries, I assume you mean native binaries, as opposed to Parrot bytec

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

On Thursday 28 May 2009 4:22:00 pm Larry Wall wrote: > I support the notion of distributing binaries because nobody's gonna > want to chew up their phone's battery doing unnecessary compiles. The > ecology of computing devices is different from ten years ago. I agree. My ideal situation would be t

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 01:06:18PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote: : Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 09:27 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: : > Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote: : > > Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 00:24 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: : > >> Please see

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

On Thursday 28 May 2009 4:04:28 pm Daniel Carrera wrote: > * We were mainly looking at Alien as a source of Perl code we could borrow. Ah, I was lumping it in with the previous proposals to actually use .deb as the official P6 package format. My mistake. > * The point of wayland76's proposal was

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 01:04:28AM +0200, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Hi Alex, > > I hve comments. > > Alex Elsayed wrote: >> While lurking in IRC, I've seen several discussions of what CPAN 6 >> should look like. Honestly, wayland76++'s idea for packaging seems the >> best to me. Most of the suggest

Re: [RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

Hi Alex, I hve comments. Alex Elsayed wrote: While lurking in IRC, I've seen several discussions of what CPAN 6 should look like. Honestly, wayland76++'s idea for packaging seems the best to me. Most of the suggestions so far, especially those based on alien, apt, yum, or other existing packa

[RFC] CPAN6 requirements analysis

While lurking in IRC, I've seen several discussions of what CPAN 6 should look like. Honestly, wayland76++'s idea for packaging seems the best to me. Most of the suggestions so far, especially those based on alien, apt, yum, or other existing package managers have a few major problems: * Alien

Re: The game of life

> "y" == yary writes: y> If anyone wants to try tackling this, a longer APL one-liner is y> referenced on the APL wikipedia page and discussed in length here: y> http://catpad.net/michael/apl/ y> As an aside, APL was the first computer language I was exposed to. y> When I was aro

Re: New CPAN

Darren Duncan wrote: Because we need things to work effectively in the general case where what was originally a single module Foo with one name becomes forked with each creator (authority) going off in their own direction, or alternately the creator makes incompatible changes, and then later s

Re: New CPAN

Daniel Carrera wrote: Mark Overmeer wrote: The problem is more serious. Perl6 installation needs to have multiple versions of the same module installed in parallel (and even run within the same program!). Why? Because we need things to work effectively in the general case where what was or

Re: The game of life

And a link explaining the shorter one-liner: http://aplwiki.com/GameOfLife

Re: The game of life

If anyone wants to try tackling this, a longer APL one-liner is referenced on the APL wikipedia page and discussed in length here: http://catpad.net/michael/apl/ As an aside, APL was the first computer language I was exposed to. When I was around 7 years old my aunt (who lived in Boston near MIT,

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Daniel Ruoso asked: >> &prefix:<[+]> > > Is that really? I mean... [ ] is a meta-operator, Sure. But once you "[]-meta" an infix operator, you get a prefix operator. See http://perlcabal.org/syn/S03.html#Reduction_operators, which states: "Any infix operator (except for non-associating opera

Re: New CPAN

Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: See http://perlcabal.org/syn/S11.html#Versioning Yeah, I reached that part earlier today (but after I sent my email). Thanks. Daniel.

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 03:33:34PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote: : On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Larry Wall wrote: : > :  I mean, prefix ops can be used in reduce, too, right? : > : > I will let you ponder the meaning of "reduce" a bit more, and the : > relationship of that to the respective arity

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Larry Wall wrote: > :  I mean, prefix ops can be used in reduce, too, right? > > I will let you ponder the meaning of "reduce" a bit more, and the > relationship of that to the respective arity of infixes vs prefixes. Well, infixes are necessarily binary, but whil

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 02:55:10PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote: : Tagentially related: why doesn't simple &+ or &<+> work for what we're : currently spelling &[+] (and which is more specifically spelled : &infix:<+>)? Oh, and why not &<+>? Mainly because we have lots of infix operators containing <

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 02:55:10PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote: : Since when are we limited to ASCII again? :) Well, we used some of Latin-1's bracket offerings, and people already carp about that. :) : If this is just a question of prefix vs infix telling you what [+] is : shorthand for, OK. But

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Since when are we limited to ASCII again? :) If this is just a question of prefix vs infix telling you what [+] is shorthand for, OK. But it seems there's still scope for conflict between the two meanings of the square brackets. I mean, prefix ops can be used in reduce, too, right? Tagentially r

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 09:30:25AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:51:33AM -0400, John Macdonald wrote: > : Yes. The full expression in raw APL for n! is: > : > : */n > : > : (where is the Greek letter iota - n is Perl's 1..$n). > > Only if the origin is 1. This breaks u

r26955 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-05-28 19:54:45 +0200 (Thu, 28 May 2009) New Revision: 26955 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod Log: typo Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod === --- docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod 2009-05-28

r26954 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-05-28 19:37:18 +0200 (Thu, 28 May 2009) New Revision: 26954 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod Log: [S05] clarify #= tags as suggested by [particle]++ Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod === ---

r26953 - docs/Perl6/Spec

Author: lwall Date: 2009-05-28 18:55:52 +0200 (Thu, 28 May 2009) New Revision: 26953 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod Log: [S05] document use of #= tags in {*} actions Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod === --- docs/P

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 09:43:58AM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote: : So that much makes sense. But I still think the two different : meanings of square brackets in operators are going to confuse people. You're welcome to introduce more bracketing characters into ASCII. :P But seriously, this is one

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:51:33AM -0400, John Macdonald wrote: : Yes. The full expression in raw APL for n! is: : : */n : : (where is the Greek letter iota - n is Perl's 1..$n). Only if the origin is 1. This breaks under )ORIGIN 0. $[ By the way, the assumption here is that everyone can

Re: New CPAN

Mark Overmeer wrote: In March 2006, Sam Vilain and I started to think about a new CPAN what we named CPAN6. There is a lot of information about the project on http://cpan6.org I know about CPAN6, thanks. It's come up a couple of times on IRC. Perhaps you could hang out on the IRC channel so w

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 09:27 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: > Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote: > > Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 00:24 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: > >> Please see > >> and talk to me about it. > > The illustratino is

RFC: How does using CPAN with Perl 6 would look like (Was: Re: New CPAN)

Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 16:18 +0200, Daniel Carrera escreveu: > Hello all, > There was some talk on IRC about a new version of CPAN to match the new > version of Perl. I just wanted to point out some previous conclusion on this issue. What currently we generically name "CPAN" is actually composed

Re: New CPAN

* Daniel Carrera (daniel.carr...@theingots.org) [090528 14:18]: > There was some talk on IRC about a new version of CPAN to match the new > version of Perl. In March 2006, Sam Vilain and I started to think about a new CPAN what we named CPAN6. There is a lot of information about the project on

Re: Amazing Perl 6

> "DC" == Damian Conway writes: DC> * Grammars built into the language: DC> grammar Expr::Arithetic { DC> rule Expression { ** $=< + - > } DC> rule Mult { ** $=< * / % > } DC> rule Pow{ ** $=< ^ > } DC>

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 05:42:58PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote: > Mark J. Reed markjreed-at-gmail.com |Perl 6| wrote: >> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 6:05 PM, John M. Dlugosz >> <2nb81l...@sneakemail.com> wrote: >> >>> And APL calls it "|¨" (two little dots high up) >>> >> >> Mr. MacDonald just

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

Daniel Ruoso daniel-at-ruoso.com |Perl 6| wrote: Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 00:24 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: Please see and talk to me about it. The illustratino is cool, but it doesn't take into account the possibility of: @a[0]

New CPAN

Hello all, There was some talk on IRC about a new version of CPAN to match the new version of Perl. Recap: wayland76 wants to integrate CPAN with the local package manager (RPM, DEB). He proposed using Software::Package for that (which is incomplete). Now some ideas of my own: A) Can we a

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Daniel Ruoso wrote: > Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 21:36 +1000, Damian Conway escreveu: >> &prefix:<[+]> > > Is that really? I mean... [ ] is a meta-operator, so > >  [+] 1, 1, 2, 3 > > isn't a prefix, but a [ ] meta with + inside and the list as argument... The operator

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 21:36 +1000, Damian Conway escreveu: > Mark J. Reed asked: > > ? And if &[+] means &infix:<+>, how do I refer to the Code of the > > list operator [+]? > &prefix:<[+]> Is that really? I mean... [ ] is a meta-operator, so [+] 1, 1, 2, 3 isn't a prefix, but a [ ] meta with

Re: Illustration of stuff we've been discussing

Em Qui, 2009-05-28 às 00:24 -0500, John M. Dlugosz escreveu: > Please see > and talk to me about it. The illustratino is cool, but it doesn't take into account the possibility of: @a[0] := $x; which means that an array is, theoretically, an a

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Mark J. Reed asked: > So how is this: > >> Any infix operator (except for non-associating operators) can be surrounded >> by square brackets in term position to create a list operator >>  that reduces using that operation: > > reconciled with this: > >> Any ordinary infix operator may be enclosed

Re: Amazing Perl 6

So how is this: > Any infix operator (except for non-associating operators) can be surrounded > by square brackets in term position to create a list operator > that reduces using that operation: reconciled with this: > Any ordinary infix operator may be enclosed in square brackets with the sam

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Jon Lang suggested: > Start with the addition operator, '1 + 1'.  Apply the reducing > metaoperator to it so that it works syntactically like a function: > '[+] 1, 1'.  Instead of calling it, pass a code reference to it: > '&[+]'. No. &[+] isn't the Code object for [+]; it's the Code object for &

Re: Amazing Perl 6

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 1:37 AM, Daniel Carrera wrote: > Hi Damian, > > This is a really good list. Mind if I copy it / modify it and post it > somewhere like my blog? One question: > >>    * Compactness of expression + semi-infinite data structures: >> >>       �...@fib = 1,1...&[+]        # The

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Daniel Carrera wrote: > This is a really good list. Mind if I copy it / modify it and post it > somewhere like my blog? That's fine. > One question: > >>    * Compactness of expression + semi-infinite data structures: >> >>       �...@fib = 1,1...&[+]        # The entire Fibonacci sequence > >

Re: How to write this "properly" in Perl 6?

In data 27 mai 2009 alle ore 23:46:40, John M. Dlugosz <2nb81l...@sneakemail.com> ha scritto: Anything in the existing implementation that's hostile to Perl 6? Just port it over by lightly editing the text or using a p5 module importer. Yes, right, but that wouldn't use Perl 6 features. T

Re: How to write this "properly" in Perl 6?

Mark (>): > but I think an idiomatic Perl 6 solution would have a proper lazy > Iterator.  How do we write one of those? Like this, I think: $ perl6 -e '.say for gather { my $n = 1; loop { take ; take "bon" for ^$n; take "digi" for ^$n; ++$n } }' That currently parses in Rakudo, but hangs since

Re: Amazing Perl 6

Hi Damian, This is a really good list. Mind if I copy it / modify it and post it somewhere like my blog? One question: * Compactness of expression + semi-infinite data structures: @fib = 1,1...&[+]# The entire Fibonacci sequence Very impressive. That's even shorter than

Re: How to write this "properly" in Perl 6?

In data 28 mai 2009 alle ore 00:13:19, Mark J. Reed ha scritto: You can write a sub to return the next step: sub bondigi { state $n=1; return (, xx $n, xx $n++); } Nahh. That's too easy... It's not fun :-) but I think an idiomatic Perl 6 solution would have a proper lazy Iterator. Ye