Branch: refs/heads/master
Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs
Commit: 187e15bcd1a5f52bf7bbd2e35ece1475bd9731af
https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/187e15bcd1a5f52bf7bbd2e35ece1475bd9731af
Author: Larry Wall
Date: 2011-08-23 (Tue, 23 Aug 2011)
Changed paths:
M S04-co
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 05:36:27PM +0200, Damian Conway wrote:
> And I'd like there to be a more consistent approach than that
> (though I don't really care what it actually is).
+1 to consistency.
Pm
> The current stance seems to be that low-level things are spelled with
> underscores, while we reserve the minus character for user-space code. Try
> grepping the specs for identifiers of built-ins that have a minus in it -- I
> didn't find any in a quick search.
I had a little more time to look
I always think of the questions game in Rosencrantz and Guildenstern
(Lenzmoritz and Damienstern?) instead of Whose Line?.
15-love, Conway!
On Tuesday, August 23, 2011, philippe.beauch...@bell.ca <
philippe.beauch...@bell.ca> wrote:
> Whoosh
> No... LOL
>
> I was making reference to another W
Whoosh
No... LOL
I was making reference to another Whose Line game, (as Damian was with the all
questions thing)... And the hyphen thing. :)
Philippe R. Beauchamp
Secure Channel | Bell Business Markets
Associate Director - Application Services
Phone: 613-781-8953
Cell:
If you're asking for an explanation of the humour, then it's easy. There
is no word play or a significant reference to a program only available
to a special audience.
Seems to me that when Damian got to the end of his email he noticed that
each sentence ended in a '?'
That's not usual. Most
Help us always-explains-the-joke-man!!...
:)
Philippe R. Beauchamp
Secure Channel | Bell Business Markets
Associate Director - Application Services
Phone: 613-781-8953
Cell:613-327-6928
- Original Message -
From: Moritz Lenz [mailto:mor...@faui2k3.org]
Sent:
Am 23.08.2011 10:56, schrieb Moritz Lenz:
And why is this entire message written in questions?
Is it? I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean.
Never mind?
Branch: refs/heads/master
Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs
Commit: d91760b2537b45a55006754f729ddd1c42f7bc4a
https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/d91760b2537b45a55006754f729ddd1c42f7bc4a
Author: Moritz Lenz
Date: 2011-08-23 (Tue, 23 Aug 2011)
Changed paths:
M S32-s
Am 23.08.2011 10:46, schrieb Damian Conway:
It's a trivial point, but why hidden_from_backtrace instead of
hidden-from-backtrace? Especially given that the associated
method is is-hidden, not is_hidden?
The current stance seems to be that low-level things are spelled with
underscores, while we
It's a trivial point, but why hidden_from_backtrace instead of
hidden-from-backtrace? Especially given that the associated
method is is-hidden, not is_hidden?
Are we consistently using underscores for multi_word traits
and hyphens for multi-word methods? Wouldn't it be nice to
have a consistent an
Branch: refs/heads/master
Home: https://github.com/perl6/specs
Commit: a7cfe02002f665c120cf4b735919779820194757
https://github.com/perl6/specs/commit/a7cfe02002f665c120cf4b735919779820194757
Author: Moritz Lenz
Date: 2011-08-23 (Tue, 23 Aug 2011)
Changed paths:
M S32-s
12 matches
Mail list logo
