There's a post online comparing Python's performance of matrix
arithmetic to C, indicating that Python's performance was 100x (yes, 2
orders of magnitude) slower than C's.
If I understand it correctly, matrix modules in Raku call GNU code
written in C to perform the actual work.
Does that make Ra
> On 12/22/20, Vadim Belman wrote:
>>
>> You interpret it incorrectly. The problem is in your '#`{' comment
On 12/23/20, Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Removing the space between the #` and { changes the error message to:
>
> ===SORRY!
While playing around with the bounding characters for the #` form, I
encountered an unexpected feature, which may or may not be a bug. If
the left bounding character (e.g. the { in #`{ occurs unbalanced in
the commented text, the compiler apparently treats it as code,
searches for the right bounder
The current version of Rakudo* is 2019.03, which makes it 5 months old.
Is there likely to be an update soon? (The underlying compiler seems
to have had a few fixes.)
(No pressure, I just want to stay as up-to-date as possible.)
I've been fiddling with multi-line comments and the bounding
characters. Naturally-paired characters e.g. #`(...) #`[...] #`{...}
all work well, but with other boundary characters like #`@@ or
#`!! produce odd, displaced, diagnostic messages. Reproducing them
is so easy, I'll leave it as
e and
> you'll see what I mean.
>
> HTH
> - Timo
>
> On 21/10/2018 18:29, Parrot Raiser wrote:
>> "put" and "say" seem to be redundant, but I'm sure there's a good
>> reason for having 2 output commands.
>>
>> Would anyone care to comment on how they differ and why, or point to
>> an explanation?
>
"put" and "say" seem to be redundant, but I'm sure there's a good
reason for having 2 output commands.
Would anyone care to comment on how they differ and why, or point to
an explanation?
OK, different paradigm, different methods.
Thanks.
Another couple of entries for the "differences" list? Even a note the
thing doesn't exist saves fruitless further searching.
On 9/14/18, Brad Gilbert wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 5:08 PM Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.c
This is probably going to be a forehead-slapper, but I can't find a
reference in either perlintro.com or http://docs.perl6.org/
(5to6-perlfunc or top-down) for the equivalents of $? and $! in
P6.What are they?
I want to be able to "run" or "shell" programs, then examine return
codes and errors. (
> Bash is treating ! as the history substitution character, and either erroring
> out or substituting a previous command line.
Thanks; that struck me between the time I hit send and got confirmation. :-)*
There are 3 kinds of yadda, yadda operator:
!!! dies with a message: Stub code executed
in block at yad1 line 2
... dies with an identical message
??? produces the message, but continues operating.
The only difference I can find between !!! and ... is that !!!
produces bizarre behaviour whe
There are 3 kinds of yadda, yadda operator:
!!! dies with a message: Stub code executed
in block at yad1 line 2
... dies with an identical message
??? produces the message, but continues operating.
The only difference I can find between !!! and ... is that !!!
produces bizarre behaviour whe
What's the simplest way of downloading current language documentation
for reading offline?
What would be the criteria for deciding whether to name P6 constants
using lower-case or UPPER_CASE names?
Generally, system constants and variables use upper-case, so
lower-case keeps user variables in a separate name space. Do
user-defined constants belong there, or in upper-case to indicate t
On 2/10/18, Darren Duncan wrote:
> I think if we want to keep "Perl" in the name we should use "C" as a
> precedent.
> Other related languages keeping "C" include "Objective C", "C#", "C++",
> >
Perl++ would work.
Looking at possible candidates from a search-engine results and
alternative manings test. some possible choices:
Mu, (the root object class),
Camelia, (the spokesbug taking over),
Shesh, (the female form of 6 in Hebrew, but unfortunately also in the
Urban Dictionary - look it up for yourself).
Where's the best current description of error messages from file
"open" commands, and how to control them?
(I'm thinking of things like the effect of adding "\n" to "die" messages in P5.)
, Sep 18, 2016 at 16:49 Parrot Raiser <1parr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> say { $_ } was the correct thing to use there. (I'm trying to avoid
>> any mention of O-O for the moment.)
>>
> “Trying to avoid any mention of O-O” seems like a Perl 6 obfuscation or
> golf cons
or reverse lines;
>>
>> not sure what you are trying to achieve otherwise, but:
>>
>>say { }
>>
>> producing something like
>>
>>-> ;; $_? is raw { #`(Block|170303864) … }
>>
>> feels entirely correct to me. :-)
>>
>>
&
This code:
#! /home/guru/bin/perl6
# Ask for some numbers from 1 - 7
# and verify that they are in range
my @names = < fred betty barney dino wilma pebbles bamm-bamm >;
my @inputs = lines();
for @inputs {
if $_ ~~ 1..7 {
say @names[$_-1];
}
else {
say "$_ out of r
This code:
1 #! /home/guru/bin/perl6
2
3 # Ask for some lines and output them in reverse
4 # Work out the appropriate EOF symbol for the OS
5
6 my $EOF = "CTRL-" ~ ($*DISTRO.is-win ?? "Z" !! "D");
7
8 say "Please enter some lines and end them with $EOF";
9
10 say { for reverse lines() {} };
11
12 #
gt;
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Aaron Sherman
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> $ perl6 -e 'my @numbers = 1..100; say [-] @numbers; say [R-] @numbers'
>>> -5048
>>> -4850
>>>
>>> In general, it&#x
This isn't a request for a feature, merely a thought experiment. We're
still in the phase where it's more important to ensure that existing
features work properly than add new ones.
How difficult would it be to include a mechanism within the REPL to
select either documentation or an example, (poss
I've just stumbled across "reversed operators", e.g. say 4 R/ 12; # 3
in the documentation. I'm curious to know why the language includes
them? I'm having trouble understanding where they would be useful.
I just stumbled across this
http://www.fields.utoronto.ca/programs/scientific/15-16/semantic/
effort:
Semantic Representation of Mathematical Knowledge Workshop.
I may be way outside my areas of competence here, but this calls to
mind some of the discussions on P6. Is there value in trying to get
Bravo Zulu, everyone, and a well-earned rest for Jonathan.
The forecast is for scattered scepticism, with occasional outbreaks of
trolls, but there should be some positive reaction from the rest of
world.
On 12/25/15, Will Coleda wrote:
> On behalf of the Rakudo development team, I’m proud to an
Is this particular change one that could be implemented
algorithmically, or at least partially so?
(E.g. For all modules
check for the presence of a ":D".
If it's there, no action.
If not, insert a line of code. Run a test.
If successful, post change.
If not, alert a human)
Because of the the special significance of $a and $b in Perl 5's sort
comparison, I always avoid using the names in examples, lest it set a
booby-trap for later.
I've noticed "a" and "b' being used in some P6 examples. Are they no
longer significant, or are they just a poor choice of identifier?
015 at 10:32, Michael Zedeler wrote:
>
>> On 06/12/15 15:54, Parrot Raiser wrote:
>>
>>> Has somebody been following the discussions on types?
>>> http://xkcd.org/1537/ :-)*
>>>
>> Perl6 has something similar to example 9.
>>
>> Ranges, hyper-o
Has somebody been following the discussions on types? http://xkcd.org/1537/ :-)*
Without doing too much work, can anyone offer an estimate of the
volume of the Perl 6 Synopses? I'm assuming that by now, they are
unlikely to undergo serious modification.
I'm trying to estimate the cost of rendering them to dead-tree
versions for study. (Personal limitation; I can look up a comm
On 6/13/14, Will Coleda wrote:
> See:
>
> https://github.com/perl6/specs/blob/master/S99-glossary.pod
> which is nicely formatted here:
> http://perlcabal.org/syn/S99.html
>
Great, thanks.
Looks as though I was late, not premature.
As typically happens with any complex project, Perl 6 development has
produced a jargon that is almost impenetrable to outsiders. (It's
mostly on top of general Perl parlance, with some CS insertions.)
In order to explain 6 to the world in general, a Rosetta Stone is
going to be necessary. The fir
>> 1. For the last few years almost all discussion is entirely on #perl6.
>
> Which seems to be working extremely well...just not for me. I can't
> manage to track these discussions (even via the logs). I find the
> interleaving of multiple threads utterly impossible to cope with.
>
Thank you for s
On 3/27/14, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> Agreed. We "just" need to come up with a consistent, intuitive way to
> handle the rest of the cases. And implement it.
>
Whenever somebody offers a solution to a problem formulated as "We
just need to " (or "why don't you just?"), it's usually a sign
tha
Minor corrections:
> may smply be my personal limitations).
s/smply/simply/
> dumb "noob" questions.
By my fairly harsh definition.
> with the sage of IBM's attempt to develop One Language To Rule Them All,
s/sage/saga/
This is related to the conversation on the Synopses, but its
sufficiently different that it probably justifies its own thread.
I want to start by making it clear that I'm not criticising the design
of Perl 6, or any of the people working so hard to make it great. I'm
just trying to address what I
Let's get the basics nailed down and working so that we can learn
them, before wandering any further into theoretical CS.
On 8/18/13, James Bowery wrote:
> Of the two key conceptual gaps in current programming language philosophy
> -- commensurability and change propagation -- commensurability, i
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Moritz Lenz wrote:
>
> The priorities for most compiler hackers is to provide good compilers over
> complete bootstrapping, and I guess most users agree with that goal.
>
Agreed.
I'm most concerned about a reliable and consistent set of features
being defined, so
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/06/beard-gallery
Maybe we should ask Larry to give up shaving for a while?
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Peter Scott wrote:
> We need multiple paths. The term "beginner" creates problems
I meant "beginner" with respect to Perl 6, but I think that Peter
basically paraphrased my arguments about the problem.
Although programming experience is an important variable, a
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 6:00 AM, Moritz Lenz wrote:
>
> I'd still start with simple script files, because that's what most
> programmers are most familiar with.
>
I'd do them in Huffman order; the interpreter involves the least
typing to start, and it's useful for demonstrating concepts. Usually,
> There are a lot of programmers who know several programming languages already,
> and who don't want to read a whole page on how to print 'Hello World', 5
> pages on
> if-statements and while-loops and another 10 pages explaining lists and
> iteration.
However experienced a programmer may be,
Perl 6 is awesome.
Its design is based on the combined experience of many clever people.
It addresses a whole range of contemporary computing problems, in fields
as diverse as text processing and compiler development. It's being
developed by, and for, some of the smartest people I want to risk
app
> S19 uses hyphens for all of perl6's long-form command-line flags.
Command-line flags and methods are separate sets. Hyphens would be the
norm for flags.
> In S28, we find $*EXECUTABLE_NAME and %*META-ARGS listed
> within 10 lines of each other.
> S32-setting-library_IO.pod and S32-setting-libr
When a subroutine is invoked with an empty parameter list, as follows:
run_stuff();
sub run_stuff {
my ($parm) = @_;
say "Parameter is $parm";
}
@_[0] contains "Any()".
Should it?
The following program:
my $skeleton = "bones\n";
my $new_file = "grave";
my $handle = open($new_file, :w);
$handle.print($skeleton);
opens the "grave" file, but leaves it empty. A last line:
close($handle);# "close()" generates an error message.
is required to get any contents in the file
Part of the tension here may be coming from the attempt to debate too
many levels of structure at once.
One of the common factors that has contributed to the longevity of
Unix (in the generic sense), and the Internet, is their layered
architectures. The kernel does its thing, the shell sits on top
48 matches
Mail list logo
