--- Larry Wall wrote:
> Yes, that's a typo.
Which reminds me, I noticed some Synopsis typos as follows.
S03:
1) "List flattening" section, sixth paragraph:
... call semantics as is does in scalar context
Change "is" to "it".
S04:
1) "The do-once loop" section, last paragraph:
... follow
[Note: Posted to both perl6-language and perl6-documentation.
Since perl6-documentation is no longer advertised, I assume
follow ups should be posted to perl6-language only].
When Audrey gave a recent talk to Sydney.pm, she pointed out
some deficiencies in the current Pugs/Perl 6 documentation
and
Flattening argument lists is not yet working in Pugs, so I can't easily play
around with this one, hence this question.
In Pugs, you can process a simple list of lists like this:
my @lol = ( [ '1a', '1b' ], [ '2a', '2b' ], [ '3a', '3b' ] );
for @lol -> $t { say "1st='$t[0]' 2nd='$t[1]'" }
Yet th
Apologies if I'm Mr Magoo, but I did a bit of a search on this just now, and
uncovered little more than a pithy quote from Piers Cawley in:
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/list-summaries/2005/p6summary.2005-07-05.html
asserting that "Multiple implementations are good, m'kay".
If anyone can point me to
--- Larry Wall wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 05:24:52PM +0200, Michele Dondi wrote:
> : But maybe that's just me. Whatever, I guess that the {casual,average}
> : programmer may be scared by its richness and complexity.
>
> But we're trying to design the OO features (indeed, all of Perl 6)
> su
A crude hack sometimes used by gung ho p5 testers is to redefine
perl built-in functions. For example:
BEGIN {
*CORE::GLOBAL::read = sub (*\$$;$) { return undef };
}
to test read failures (and so boost your Devel::Cover score :-).
This technique is not very convenient (must be in a BEGIN bloc
S03 does not seem to detail a complete list of all Perl 6 operators.
For example, it explicitly mentions += but does not mention -=
Googling around, I found the Perl 6 Periodic Table of Operators
http://www.ozonehouse.com/mark/blog/code/PeriodicTable.html
(which I assume does not form part of the
I noticed the Pugs folks have started porting File::Spec and
other modules to Pugs, which leads me to ask this question.
I've also taken a look at Rod Adams S29.
There a quite a few p5 standard libraries with crusty old user
interfaces that many folks dislike. Two that people often seem
to complai
