On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:24:47 +0200, Yuval Kogman wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 16:57:51 +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005 20:17:05 +0200, TSa wrote:
> > > Piers Cawley wrote:
> > > >>Exactly which exception is continued?
> > > >
# they can do if their order is refused, all they can do is try another
# shop, or give up and go home
method buy_book($book){
$random_bookshop.order($book);
CATCH{ fail Err::BookObviouslyDoesntExist; }
}
}
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hestons' First Law: I qualify virtually everything I say.
ber the first capture in one alternative, does that
affect the numbering of the other alternatives?
# $4$4
rx/ [ $4:=(a) | (b) ] /;
> Note that, outside a rule, C<@1> is simply a shorthand for C<@{$1}>
Is @/ also a shorthand for @{$/} ?
--
Peter Haworth
e believe that in preference to the operator.
Don't we trust the programmer more than the data? I want this code to
produce 4660, 22136, 2832, 3394; not 4660, 22136, 4, 42.
for '1234','5678','0b10','0d42' {
say 0x $_;
}
--
Peter Haworth [
piler to figure things out, it's going to be even
harder for the programmer.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I think this is one of those traumatic things eggs have to face
to prepare a good omelette."
-- Jarkko Hietaniemi
nce
> to a closure outside of its official "sub" scope, it is illegal to
> return from it.
Presumably this illegality only applies to closures not officially
declared as subs, methods or submethods?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Her vocabulary was as bad as, like, whatever."
t;<>> variant
* interpolation allowed in the double quoted variant.
That said, I really wish we could keep perl5's $hash{key}. It's obviously a
subscript, and I use constant bareword keys much more frequently than zero-arg
sub/builtin calls in hash subscripts.
--
Peter
etter to me. I'm going to be surprised by the
behaviour of code that works like yours for a long time before I get used to
it.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I have to continue using UUCP for sentimental reasons"
-- Ian Lance Taylor
[1]; # array-like
$a['1'];# array-like
$a{1}; # hash-like
$a{'1'};# hash-like
Maybe it is the right way round, and I've read your remarks the wrong way.
Or maybe it is the value type which determines the type of access at the PMC
level, and it
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:02:18 -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> Peter Haworth:
> # @b = @a.grep { /\S/ }, $c;
> #
> # how does the compiler know whether $c is an argument to grep,
> # or another element to be assigned to @b?
>
> The same way it does when it sees a normal sub?
>
On 10 Dec 2002 17:25:34 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Haworth) writes:
> > Fair enough; that simplifies things somewhat. However, you can't tell
> > how many arguments they take. How do you parse this without the
> > programmer specifying a great d
On 10 Dec 2002 15:34:11 +, Simon Cozens wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Haworth) writes:
> > To know whether the method takes a block, you need to know how it's been
> > declared. In other words, the type of @a needs to be known to find
> > grep's declaratio
sort must specify its return type so that part's
declaration may be found.
That's all fine for the standard/builtin methods on arrays, but its a bit
unperl-like to force users to highly specify everything. Of course, if they
do declare methods with all the bells and whistles, they get the b
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002 14:30:24 +, Peter Haworth wrote:
> So to get the same yield context, each call to the coroutine has to be from
> the same calling frame. If you want to get several values from the same
> coroutine, but from different calling contexts, can you avoid the need to
>
>> but reads better than "same" ("Same as what?").
> >
> > Insert obligatory reference to Eiffel here, which IIR uses the word
> > "once":
But that means "once per system", not "once per unique argument list".
--
Pet
,$next){
...
if $val ~~ something_or_other() {
my $quux = $next();
...
}
}
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"...I find myself wondering if Larry Ellison and Tim Curry
were separated at birth...hmm..."
-- Tom Good
," it pretty much can't be the same as any of the other
operators, since that introduces ambiguity all over the place. This is
unfortunate, since perl seems to use every printable ASCII character for
something. Using French quotes gets around this, since they aren't being
used for an
eans? I really liked the idea that not and xor were
just the same operator, but unary/binary. Otherwise, we have ! for boolean
negation only, while ^ does the same thing for other types, as well as xor
for everything. I don't mind leaving ! in as a synonym.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL
l marked as such,
which (at least so far) Perl6 constructors aren't.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The Hotmail migration is becoming the IT equivalent of painting-the-Forth-
bridge, evidently. Once you've think you've finished migrating one end, more
FreeBSD box
ed condition has to be of the form
C<< x > 9 >> or any other value lower than 10. C<< a || b >> is weaker than
C<< a >>
> Are there
> other ways to do it, just to mull them over?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I remember being
oized is something
is pre{ $this <= 42 }
is pre{ $that == $this / 2 }
{
# implementation goes here
} is post{
# postcondition 1
} is post{
# postcondition 2
}
If you want an abstract method, just omit the implementation block.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PR
ush receives the contents of
@b in its @list parameter. 6 is an explicit arrayref, so that's what push gets
given. I would argue that 7 is like 6, except that it copies @b's elements.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reporter: Mr Gandhi, what do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.
spell it wrong? There needs to be some way of
indicating whether or not the lexical gets set - that way the strict pragma
(or perl6 equivalent) can catch typos.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"To be considered half as good as Microsoft,
Linux has to work twice as fast.
Fortunately, this is easy."
rators used (:= inside the rule, = inside the code)
seems a bit confusing to me; I can't see that they're really doing anything
different:
/ $x := (gr\w+) /vs/ (gr\w+) { let $x = $1 } /
Shouldn't they both use C< := > ?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Some more data?
No, no more. Please, no more...
-- Yanick, examining perl's strange behaviour
er explictly ask for
the other options (of which there are sevaral), we only give them exactly
what they want. Perl 5 gives you the most flexible way by default (pass by
ref, modifiable), and makes one other option (pass by val, modifiable) easy,
but has occassionally surprising results, such as aut
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002 16:42:03 +0100, Peter Haworth wrote:
> > When you invoke a continuation you put the call scratchpads and lexical
> > scratchpads back to the state they were when you took the continuation.
>
> If you restore the lexicals, how does this ever finish?
Ne
$foo--;
> invoke($cont);
> }
>
> When you invoke a continuation you put the call scratchpads and lexical
> scratchpads back to the state they were when you took the continuation.
If you restore the lexicals, how does this ever finish?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL P
in some distant future version of Perl, perhaps somewhere
> around the year 2168.
That's a long time for implementation :-)
Well, this is really only a problem for p52p6, I suppose.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"At IBM, we have no hesitation to steal or b
's another
> argument for case differentiation. By this argument, the rethink should
> go in the opposite direction, giving us catch/CATCH.
I like that, especially because it makes the try with no CATCH read better:
try { ... } # But what happens if we fail?
catch { ... } # Implicit CAT
e how references to sub arguments
are compiled anyway, in which case there's no problem.
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Master, does Emacs have the Buddha nature?" the novice asked.
The Chief Priest had been in the temple for many years and could be
relied upon to
t the carets, like $got and $expected do, or
are they required, like &^sub ?
--
Peter Haworth [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In Cyberspace no one can hear you scream, unless they have a sound card.
[Apologies for the late reply. Still catching up]
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:51:01 -0500, David L. Nicol said:
> What if its a method of anything in an array? $_ is already
> a reference to the object on the array in for loops rather
> than a copy of it. What if we make change be not something a
32 matches
Mail list logo
