Damian Conway wrote:
>Very nice. And yes, too many brackets of various kinds.
>Also $this doesn't really describe what it stores.
>Maybe $first would be better?
>
as i see it, $first describes what is true of the implementation of passing
the object reference, but looking at the $this in the f
mp;vm=
>
or cheaper at Bookpool
http://www.bookpool.com/.x/6jipibmev1/sm/0201100886
--
-mark koopman
WebSideStory 10182 Telesis Court
San Diego CA 92121 858-546-1182 ext 318
--
-mark koopman
WebSideStory 10182 Telesis Court
San Diego CA 92121 858-546-1182 ext 318
ure syntax. does anyone else question making aliases like 'with' from 'for'?
a 'with' alias could open the door on purely confusing code like this:
with( my $i; $i < 10; $i++ ){ ... }
instead of having an standard 'with' that only works on objects like this:
with( MyObject->new() ) {
.setIt("blah");
...
}
--
-mark koopman
WebSideStory 10182 Telesis Court
San Diego CA 92121 858-546-1182 ext 318
>
> * Objects are bigger since they all need an .ISA property, if we toss the
> per-class @ISA
>
with an accessible .ISA property, are previous instaniated objects
'brought-up-to-speed' with this new behaviour or not?
--
Mark Koopman
Software Engi
in Hindi?
>
> Will ebonics be included in this locale thingy?
>
> p
it better, or that's discrimination :|
--
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
## Mark Koopman
## Software Engineer
##
## WebSideStory, Inc
##
## 10182 Telesis Court
## San Diego CA 92121
## 858.546.1182.##.318
## 858.546.0480.fax
Damian Conway wrote:
> Simon observed:
>
>> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:30:07PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>> >- A while ago, someone suggested that the word 'has' be an alias
>> > for 'is', so that when you roll your own properties, you could write
>> > more-grammatically-
rds were merely syntactic sugar for each other. is|are|has|: seem
> like far too many ways to express exactly the same concept.
>
>
i think that's the idea...they have similar meanings, so they should do
similar things. hey it's the English language, i'll leave it up to s
>
> > I think Uri's qh() suggestion is the cleanest:
>
> Interesting train of thought, since one of the ideas was that qw() is
> ugly and has to go. (Larry's been saying this for nearly two years now,
> it's just that people sometimes don't listen. :) Let's keep it and add
> something similarly
>Perl 5Perl 6
>-
>print "Next is " . $i + 1;print "Next is " + $i + 1;
this is the root of the problemPerl 5 version is easy to
understand, Perl 6 version is still ambiguous
gt;
>-=- James Mastros
> --
> The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
> source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger,
> who can no longer pause to wonder and stand wrapt in awe, is as good as dead.
> -=
this. are we considering to deprecate this type of bad style, and force
to a programmer to, in this case, supply a ref to %baz in the arguements to
this sub?
Mark Koopman
Software Engineer
WebSideStory, Inc
10182 Telesis Court
San Diego CA 92121
858.546.1182.##.318
858.546.0480.fax
perl -e '
where are all RFCs posted for perl6?
is this the main discussion board for perl6
development, or has the development broken down
into separate group-lists? if it's broken down,
where would i find a listing of lists?
thanks much,
Mark Koopman
Software Engineer
WebSideStory, Inc
12 matches
Mail list logo
