I think this is one of many steps in the right direction. Actually, I have a
class item defined in my fork as:
class foo
reserve bar scalar;
member bar {
default(bar) = '1';
set(bar) = {some code};
get(bar) = {some code};
ensure(bar) = {some code};
confirm(bar) = {some co
This makes no sense. ?: tests a boolean value, which is either true or false.
There is no ternary state for a boolean value. True/False, Yes/No, On/Off,
1/0. Are you suggesting Yes/No/Maybe? Or are you redefining True and False?
Doesn't matter. What you're asking has no counterpart in boolean l
Oh boo hoo. Might I suggest a good introductory Perl book?
p
On Saturday 28 July 2001 12:32, raptor wrote:
> I've/m never used/ing "elseif" ( i hate it :") from the time I have to
> edit a perl script of other person that had 25 pages non-stop if-elsif
> sequence) ... never mind there is two c
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2001 at 10:31:22PM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
> > We can have a huge thread, just like before, but until we see any kind
> > of update from Larry as to if he has changed his mind it is all a bit
> > pointless.
>
> For what it's worth, I like it.
>
> > > Does anyone else see a prob
> > Well, I *have* been following the discussion. And to me, it looks indeed
> > like you, Simon, were indeed attacking ME on non-technical grounds.
> > Vijay just jumped in for him, like a lioness trying to protect her
> > kittens.
>
> Which he does from time to time, as do most of us, myself lik
> -Original Message-
> From: Bart Lateur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2001 10:48 AM
> To: Perl 6 Language Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Social Reform
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 08:54:13 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S.
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 05:19:26PM -0700, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
> > I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking
> a person", not
> > Vijay.
>
> You are wrong. Go back through the archives. Vijay has posted four
> messages: two of which are critical of Perl, two of which a
> If you have not been following this thread, then maybe that is
> the reason for
> the confused-sounding nature of your email.
>
> I would say Simon was the one "ignoring an issue and attacking a
> person", not
> Vijay. I think Vijay was the one pointing out that this person ("Me") was
> contrib
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 3:46 AM
> To: Vijay Singh
> Cc: Me; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Multi-dimensional arrays and relational db data
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 10:13:28PM -0800, Vijay Singh wrote:
> > Why
> Previously, on St. Elsewhere...
>
> Simon(e) writes...
> > But of course, I'm sure you already know what makes
> > good language design, because otherwise you wouldn't
> > be mouthing off in here...
>
> Why is it that "Me" is *mouthing off*, but you're not? Why is that?
> What makes you so *spec
> Perl is far more practical than experimental.
Not at the moment. That's the problem.
(Note the subtle subject change back to its original intent.)
p
> -Original Message-
> From: Vijay Singh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2001 10:02 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Python...
>
>
>
> Python? Didn't know you were so into tuples...
>
> I thought your head would be turned by Ruby ;-)
It is
> "Where's the likes of David Grove when you need one?"
I don't even know what you're talking about.
Leave me alone. I'm learning Python...
again.
p
> David Grove writes:
> : > That's not how I see it. The filehandle is naturally true if it
> : > succeeds. It's the undef value that wants to have more information.
> : > In fact, you could view $! as a poor-man's way of extracting the error
>
> That's not how I see it. The filehandle is naturally true if it
> succeeds. It's the undef value that wants to have more information.
> In fact, you could view $! as a poor-man's way of extracting the error
> that was attached to the last undef.
If I were wealthy enough in time and patience t
> --- Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Oh, didn't Larry tell you? We're making perl's parser locale-aware so
> > it uses the local language to determine what the keywords are.
> > I thought that was in the list of things you'd need to take into
> > account when you wrote the parser...
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 04:50:17PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > Pardon my indelicacy, but - Screw how it looks in Perl5.
>
> I'm not telling you how it *looks* in Perl 5, I'm telling you (in Perl 5
> terms) what it will *mean*.
nice save
p
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 01:25:51PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> > There must be some reason why a language like Sather isn't more popular.
> > I think that iters are part of the problem.
>
> That smacks of the Politician's Syllogism:
> Something is wrong.
> This is something.
> Theref
> -Original Message-
> From: Larry Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2001 6:05 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: On Vacation
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> : And about the whole
> throwing-out-baby-in-one-grand-bathwater-disposa
> Well, I think we should take a step back and answer a few key questions:
>
> 1. Do we want to be able to use Perl 5 modules in a
>Perl 6 program (without conversion)?
For a while, quite possibly, I'd say.
When 5.6 came out, I was in module hell, trying to get 5.005 modules to
compi
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 10:00:13PM +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 01:49:30PM -0700, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > > We need to keep syntactic compatibility, which means we need
> to keep the
> > > ability for perl6 to USE PERL5.
> >
> > I think you're in violent agreemen
> -Original Message-
> From: Adam Turoff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 3:31 PM
> To: David Goehrig
> Cc: Larry Wall; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Perl, the new generation
>
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 12:13:13PM -0700, David Goehrig wrote:
> > On Thu, May 10
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 11:55:36AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>
> > If you talk that way, people are going to start believing it.
> [snip]
>
> Some of us are are talking that way because we already
> beleive it. You can't make the transition from Attic
> Greek to Koine without c
> -Original Message-
> From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 11:58 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: what I meant about hungarian notation
>
>
> Larry Wall wrote:
> >
> > : do you think conflating @ and % would be a perl6 design win?
> >
> > No
> Nope, I still think most ordinary people want different operators for
> strings than for numbers. Dictionaries and calculators have very
> different interfaces in the real world, and it's false economy to
> overgeneralize. Witness the travails of people trying to use
> cell phones to type mess
/me likes. /me likes a lot.
David T. Grove
Blue Square Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Dave Hartnoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 8:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Apoc2 - concerns : new mascot?
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 8:01 AM
> To: Dave Mitchell
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: The 5% solution
>
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 10:19:10AM +0100, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> > to be such that the writing of the
> As my Con Law professor was fond of saying, "Horse hooey!"*
Camel cookies.
;-)
> These types of issues are not nearly so clear cut as many company's
> would have people believe. E.g., O'Reilly is book publisher that
> engages in the business of publishing and selling books for a
> profit. T
"Core Perl" is probably trademarked to Sun Microsystems. ;-)
David T. Grove
Blue Square Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: John L. Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 1:29 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Apoc2
> [...] subject to ethnic
> cleansing. Culture wars arise spontaneously, but that should not deter
> us from enabling people to build new cultures. [...]
Does that mean we can nuke Redmond and move on to reality in corporate IS
now?
};P
> -Original Message-
> From: John Porter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 11:51 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: what I meant about hungarian notation
>
>
> David Grove wrote:
> > $ is a singularity, @ is a multiplicity
/me ponders the use of a cat in that context... Furball?
David T. Grove
Blue Square Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:55 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Apoc2 -
> >An object of type "abstracted reference to a chair" is _NOT_ an object of
> >type "numeric or string that magicly switches between as needed"
>
> So what you're really saying is that references aren't really scalars,
> but their own type. Thus they need their own prefix.
>
> But we've sort of r
EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Apoc2 - concerns : new mascot?
>
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2001 10:24:26 -0400, David Grove wrote:
>
> >I remember someone (whether at O'Reilly or
> >not I don't remember) saying that, even if it looks like a horse
> but has a
&g
>
> > sane indentation by making it part of the language, Perl is a
> > language that enforces a dialect of hungarian notation by making
> > its variable decorations an intrinsic part of the language.
>
> But $, @, and % indicate data organization, not type...
Actually they do show "type", thoug
> Hungarian notation is any of a variety of standards for organizing
> a computer program by selecting a schema for naming your variables
> so that their type is readily available to someone familiar with
> the notation.
I used to request hungarian notation from programmers who worked for me,
unt
Probably not if it had scales, webbed feet, a hookbill, antennae, a furry
coontail, and udders. Otherwise, if it looks like a camel at all, it's
considered a trademark violation. I remember someone (whether at O'Reilly or
not I don't remember) saying that, even if it looks like a horse but has a
h
> -Original Message-
> From: Jarkko Hietaniemi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 5:26 PM
> To: David Grove
> Cc: Perl 6 Language Mailing List
> Subject: Re: .NET
>
>
> (still waiting
> > for "something original for a change&
> > am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of
> > Perl 6 and the .NET platform.
> > . . . many things in .NET have been discussed similarly here.
>
> That's because .NET attempts to address real-world issues.
> The goals of .NET are not evil in and of themselves, you know.
I've been recently looking over the specification for C# and the .NET
platform (and falling for very little of the verbage: almost every line of
the first chapter of book I'm reading contains at least one oxymoron), and
am seeing some similarities between some of the proposed goals of Perl 6 and
t
Given that Perl 5 internals post 5.004 caused the need for a rewrite
anyway, I'd imagine that this would be a particularly horrid idea. The
Perl 5 path is almost dead: adventurers and Win32 users are the vast
majority using it at all. Add Solaris 8 1/01 to the list of OS's that have
completely rej
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Whipp wrote:
> > > A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to
program
> > > in than some that do.
> >
> > The obvious reply is: "There's more than one way to do it"
>
> To which the obvious reply is:
>
> 'Although the P
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 11:42:23AM +0000, David Grove wrote:
> > Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq
> away
> > from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
>
I tried to comment on "apocalypse" in Larry's most likely sense, but there
was a mail flub (now corrected).
Apocalypse is a greek word meaning that which comes out from (apo- eq away
from) hiding, i.e., revelation. In the biblical sense, it refers to
revealing that which was previously unseen or
> OK, before this *completely* heads into the direction of advocacy,
which
> it's dangerous close to anyway, you need to qualify that.
Uh, have you followed this thread? It's nothing but another perlbashing
session by a verbosity monger who can't handle $.
"David Grove" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Helton, Brandon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Please CC Otto in all replies concerning this topic. I want to make
> sure
> > he
> > reads how wrong he is about Per
"Helton, Brandon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please CC Otto in all replies concerning this topic. I want to make
sure
> he
> reads how wrong he is about Perl and its readability and I think Simon
> sums it
> up perfectly here.
Give the braindead no head, Brandon. I've recently come acr
Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 09:36 AM 2/22/2001 +0000, David Grove wrote:
> >This is what's scaring me about all this talk about
> >exceptions... it can break this mold and make Perl into a "complainer
> >language" belching up un
Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2001 17:32:50 -0500 (EST), Sam Tregar wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 21 Feb 2001, Bart Lateur wrote:
> >
> >> Actually, it's pretty common. Only, most languages are not as
forgiving
> >> as perl, and what is merely a warning in Perl, is a fatal
> [subject]: "It's funny. Laugh."
I know. I was having fun. We haven't had a lurktrollmuffin in here before
and it was a good diversion from the drollery of waiting...
'Sides, I happen to _like_ defending Perl from nonsensicals, especially
particularly abusive ones.
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTEC
yaphet jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Feeding the troll:
>
> careful with the troll talk: remember, your god's favorite book
> is the "lord of the rings"...chock full of trolls...and hobbits, too!
>
> >> => example 2: ruby
> >> => now more popular than python in its native japan
yaphet jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this is completely false when applied to real programming languages.
Please disclose what language you represent.
> => example 1: php
> => relatively easy to learn
> . retains basic perl syntax
> . less cryptic (but more verbose)
>
Nick, make a decision. As for myself, I won't sit back and watch this.
yaphet jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> despite all "cyber" appearances to the contrary, i'm one of you - but
who?
I've been looking back through my archives trying to figure out who you
are. You are certainly not someon
yaphet jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Johan Vromans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >>John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>As someone else said before me, Perl should not be changed
> >>Just Because We Can. Aspects which have proven usefulness and
> >>are deeply eng
Steve Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> > Has anyone considered the problems associated with XS code, or
whatever
> > its replacement is?
>
> Pardon my ignorance, but what's XS code?
Simply put (and paraphrastically, so don't nitpick, anyone), XS is using a
funk
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 04:38 PM 2/15/2001 -0300, Branden wrote:
>
> >Yeah. Beginners. I was one too. And I remember always falling on
these...
> >But that's OK, since we probably don't want any new Perl
programmers...
>
> I've skipped pretty much all this thread so fa
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 02:17 PM 2/5/2001 -0200, Branden wrote:
> > > I think that, if you want this behavior, a module that implements
it
> > > would be just fine. (Why muck with "use"?) To use a module name
> > > that seems like it could fit this purpose:
> > >
> >
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Simon Cozens wrote:
> > John Porter wrote:
> > > But you need to remember it anyway, so remembering it for time() is
> > > no added burden.
> >
> > Uhm. NO! Remembering that $x+1 things have changed is an "added
burden"
> > over remembering that $x
Jarkko Hietaniemi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The desire to know the name of the runtime platform is a misdirected
> desire.
> What you really want to know is whether function Foo will be there,
what
> kind of signature it has, whether file Bar will be there, what kind of
> format it has,
I have an idea. Send that japanese to Larry and have him translate it.
However he translates it, it's official.
p
Jeff Okamoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 09:42:12PM -0500, Brian Finney wrote:
> > > say we start with this number
> > > 123,456,789
> > >
> > > one
"Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Jan 2001, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > But, but... 0.21 is *not* 'point twenty one', it's 'point two one',
> > otherwise you get into weirdness with: .21 and .210 being spoken as
> > 'point twenty one' and 'point two hundred (?:and)? ten'
Tad McClellan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Sorry to mention the code name thing again, I thought the
> whole endeavor rather silly.
>
> But I just stumbled upon the dictionary definition below, so
> I submit it for due (mis)consideration:
>
>
> pearly everlasting:
>
>n. A rhi
On Wednesday, October 04, 2000 4:15 AM, Tom Christiansen
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> >POD, presumably. Or maybe son-of-POD; it would be nice to have better
> >support for tables and lists.
>
> We did this for the camel. Which, I remind the world, was
> written in pod.
>
> ''tom
Uh...
w
> *All* communities have this. It's the nature of people. Pretending it might
> be otherwise is to paint a rather pleasant utopian fantasy that,
> unfortunately, can't exist. (At least not one that has people in it) It's
> one of the common failings of people involved in open source projects.
> As
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:02 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> > The Perl-KGB-elite has got to go, and a free republic must replace
> > it.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as your entire post, neither in form nor content,
> but I do have concerns about the sociopsycho(patho)logy
I am in the process of drafting a proposal, and have at a minimum split the
thread. However, thank you for pointing out which list this should go in. I'll
redirect further messages there.
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 11:56 AM, Nathan Torkington [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> It's valid to wa
Realize that you are trying to convince a group who uses POD at the command
line (no, not everybody) to use a complete markup language. We're talking about
self-commenting code, sir, not a strict documentation system with indices and
the likes in any formal sense. Even if a documentation system
I'm afraid I had a family crisis yesterday, else another RFC would have been
submitted.
Part of Perl's problems, a severe internal problem that has external (user
side) consequences, is that Perl does *not* have anyone to speak policy with,
while the community itself is submerged in issues of
On Wednesday, September 27, 2000 10:21 AM, John Porter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> Philip Newton wrote:
> > On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> > >
> > > By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
> > > indentation to define block structure.
> >
> > What an idea! I
On Wednesday, September 27, 2000 4:17 AM, Tom Christiansen
[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> This is screaming mad. I will become perl6's greatest detractor and
> anti-campaigner if this nullcrap happens. And I will never shut up
> about it,
> either. Mark my words.
Quote from Larry: "I have
70 matches
Mail list logo
