elop on Parrot (or help develop Parrot itself), we
strongly recommend that you keep up with the latest and best Parrot code by
accessing our source code repository. Instructions for doing this are at
<http://www.parrotcode.org/source.html>.
I'd like to thank all our contributors for making this possible, and our
sponsors for supporting this project.
Share & Enjoy!
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
e it happen, but if the
Wizard type object is anonymous, it should still be possible to say
my $gandalf;
and similarly it should be possible to use arbitrary expressions for all
other type/meta operations including introspection, modification,
subclassing, etc.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 02:51:55PM -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 12:53:29PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> > The type of metaobject Foo.meta might be called "Class" if that's what the
> > metaobject protocol decides it should be, but Perl the Lan
apply, as does the proposal
that all _metaobjects_ that currently are correlated with packages should
instead just _do_ Package.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
moving a class requires deleting exactly one namespace entry.
There is no confusion as to which object is "the" class object.
There is no confusion as to what should be looked up where.
As something of a probing attack -- to provoke informative rebuttal -- I'd
like to propos
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 02:52:53PM -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> { copied to P6L for the "use case" question below }
Well, that message wasn't, but this one is...
What's the relationship in perl6 between namespaces and classes?
For example, given:
package Foo { sub ba
always found the
polarity hard to remember.
I like grep.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ion of close-source modules. If they
exist and work, he's not going to break them, but he's not going to do
*anything* to specially support them.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ain point of named parameters to free the caller from the
tyranny of argument order (and vice versa). It seems to me you're
asking for the worst of both worlds.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
So even if you want to intermix the positional parameters with named,
there's no need for us to support intermixing positional parameter
*syntax* with named...?
/me relurks
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 03:43:42PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
> Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >This:
> >multi sub is_equal(Integer $a, Integer where { $_ == $a } $b: ) { 1 }
> >hurts. At least as I've been given to understand it[*], is impossible
se
the syntax &?CALLER::BLOCK to denote it.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
r's
declaration introduces a new lexical scope to its right. But that
bridge was crossed when you allowed earlier parameters to
participate in the calculation of default values for later ones.
At least it doesn't interfere with MMD.
[*] Autrijus introduced me to this co
b { eval $^codestring } }
say foo().('$x');
> I claim that that should print 1. Chip claims it should throw a warning about
> because of timely destruction.
More like an error from the eval: '$x: no such variable in scope'.
--
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7;re still arbitrarily preferring
one method of getting the cwd.
[*] Using the fchdir() system call, you can get close, but it takes
three system calls instead of one; and if you have no fchdir(),
you're out of luck. Oh, and it's not thread-safe.
--
Chip Salzenberg
the execution of cwd(),
rather than beforehand
> [2] The state of Cwd.pm's docs add to my anxiety.
Sucker punch. :-)
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
According to Michael G Schwern:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 08:31:57PM -0400, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > There are several methods to determine the current directory.
>
> Perl 6 is going to have to decide on some sort of standard internal getcwd
> technique, $CWD or not.
I don&#
ot always -- try removing a directory that's the pwd of another
> process.
Oh, the _directory_ is still there. :-)
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
27;, '../bar';
say $CWD; # Well? Which is it?
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
According to Abhijit Mahabal:
> sub f2c (Num $temp doc "Temperature in degrees F") {...}
Niiiice.
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
{...}
Or would I be forced to spell it doc('stuff') ?
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
it's
better. I suspect Larry might have passed arguments by read-only
reference in Perl 5 as well, had he found a way to make it fast.
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
According to Larry Wall:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2005 at 07:38:10PM -0000, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> : And might I also ask why in Perl 6 (if not Parrot) there seems to be
> : no type support for strings with known encodings which are not subsets
> : of Unicode?
>
> Well, because
According to Rod Adams:
> Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >* As far as I can tell, the choice of spelling an array parameter
> > C or C is entirely cosmetic: both @a and
> > $a are capable of holding an Array reference. Is there actually
> > a difference, e.g. in how the
subsets
of Unicode?
If the explanations are "you have greatly misunderstood the contents
of Synopsis $foo", I will happily retire to my reading room.
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"What I cannot create, I do not understand." - Richard Feynman
raints for you. You can even add your own
constraints with C subtyping. Amaze your enemies!
Confound your friends! Use Perl6::Subs today!
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
here a reason that S03 doesn't list them?
What are their precedence(s)?
--
Chip Salzenberg- a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Open Source is not an excuse to write fun code
then leave the actual work to others.
According to Austin Hastings:
> When you consider some of the issues, it's sort of obvious that they're
> trying *real* hard not to say, "Look the Americans solved this problem
> already."
Three words: "Second System Effect".
--
Chip Salzenberg
According to Michael Lazzaro:
> On Tuesday, December 16, 2003, at 04:01 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >... an anecdote ...
> >... and a public relations issue.
> >Let us not confuse them.
>
> I'm not sure I understand which part of that is in conflict.
Speed is
which, out of spite, I will not name,
... and a public relations issue.
Let us not confuse them.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"I wanted to play hopscotch with the impenetrable mystery of existence,
but he stepped in a wormhole and had to go in early." // MST3K
According to Jonathan Scott Duff:
> Those classes that are "closed" can be opened at run-time and the
> user pays the penalty then when they try to modify the class [...]
The optimization that can be reversed is not the true optimization.
--
Chip Salzenberg
in a pond
to me ... but as a means to optimization it's a good idea, AFAICT.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"I wanted to play hopscotch with the impenetrable mystery of existence,
but he stepped in a wormhole and had to go in early." // MST3K
According to Larry Wall:
> If, by the time the entire program is parsed, nobody has said they
> want to extend an interface, then the interface can be considered
> closed.
What with C and its various wrappers, when can the program
be said to be fully parsed? <- anticipating &
According to Michael Lazzaro:
>?? ?? ?? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
>??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
>??? ???
>??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
Am I the only person who discovered Korean spam on p6-lang?
--
Chip Salzenberg
? I think .{x} reads better than $_{x} , esp. in parallel with the
method call in the same loop.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
According to Larry Wall:
> On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> : I rather like Perl 5's scalar comma operator.
>
> Most of the uses of which are actually in void context [...]
I didn't realize you were distinguishing scalar from void in this, uh,
context. I agre
across @$a? The equivalent of that gotcha
was forever bugging me in Python (gack).
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
1)
? And if someone says that I have to write:
$a = (1,)
then I am going on the warpath. That Way Lay Python.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
requiring the comma is exactly
what Python does[1], and I'm sure I don't want that misfeature in Perl.
[1] for tuples in (), that is. lists use []
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
tactical hack would be a
horrible choice for borrowing from Python. Heck, I'd rather Perl take
Python's "import" than this abomination of punctuation.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
() act in any way like []
is a VERY BAD IDEA.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
According to Luke Palmer:
> I think to get Perl5 behavioueaur :), you do this:
>
> my @flatL = ( *("1a", "2a"), *("1b", "2b") );
Geez, I hope not, because that would imply that in
my @v = ( &func() );
that &func is called
if the names would be &FALSE and &TRUE to avoid polluting
the non-all-caps namespace ... ?
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
According to Dan Sugalski:
> At 9:50 PM -0400 7/9/02, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> >3a. If so, how can one distinguish among the e.g. many C
> >variables declared within the current function?
>
> One pad per block, rather than per sub.
I just remembered why I thoug
According to Dan Sugalski:
> One pad per block, rather than per sub.
Because, of course, all blocks are subs. Got it.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
7;&foo'} = sub { ... };
> }
Got it.
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
$x = 2; print $x }
The comings and goings of C<$x> in this code can't be
represented in C<%MY> (unless answer #3 above is "yes",
in which case this branch of questions is void).
Larry? Damian? Allison? ("Chief? McCloud?")
--
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. -<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"It furthers one to have somewhere to go."
47 matches
Mail list logo
