thing but
whitespace separates it from EOL.
Please tell me you're serious.
We could mimick XQuery where it is the comment terminator.
http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery/#comments
--
Robin Berjon
Parrot is some way from, well, running it.
Unfortunately I will be missing this historic event, I'm sure there'll
be videos after the fact but is there any chance of getting a live video
feed of it? The suspense is killing me...
--
Robin Berjon
me as unlikely.
Specifying the OS is not enough, you need at least the keyboard layout.
It would be impossible to have shortcuts involving | or \ on a French
keyboard since they are respectively Alt-Shift-L and Alt-Shift-:
OS X / iBook / fr-fr
« Alt-è
» Alt-Shit-è
--
Robin Berjon
chromatic wrote:
With Apocalypse 12 (soon!)
I'm sorry but this just begs for the question: (vaguely) how soon? :)
I get all excited whenever I hear "Perl" and "six" in the same sentence,
and it's building up to be unbearable ;)
--
Robin Berjon
d it's not there,
they'll reinvent it, poorly.
I'd use it for marshalling objects composed of many things to something
that makes sense to someone else's idea of what they should be, eg an
XML Schema. Pick what it's most alike to and marshall as that.
--
Robin Berjon
Damian Conway wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
> I wasn't proposing to come up with short names for all the Unicode
> repertoire, just for the characters that are used as operators :) That
> shouldn't be too long, should it?
I'm not so sure about that. I can already
Damian Conway wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
Picking the HTML entity names is better than the Unicode ones as the
latter are way too long. They may not cover all the characters we
need, but we can make up missing ones in a consistent fashion.
I fear there are too many "missing ones" for
mes is better than the Unicode ones as the
latter are way too long. They may not cover all the characters we need,
but we can make up missing ones in a consistent fashion.
--
Robin Berjon
My, is this a conspiracy to drag -internals onto -language to make it look alive? :)
You guys almost made me drop my coffee mug...
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Scientist, Expway http://expway.com/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
normally have.
I'm certain that when a more definitive book is started, there will be much more
time to ask all the interesting people for input. Please don't lose your
motivation :)
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Kurt Starsinic wrote:
On Mar 26, Robin Berjon wrote:
DAGs wouldn't enough though, most XML tree representations aren't really
trees, they're very cyclic.
Pardon me? Could you please provide an example?
XML per se, using an impoverished Information Set (no IDs) can be considere
Stéphane Payrard wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:40:56PM +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
Efficient annotation and traversal would go a long way, but almost all
useful XML representations have loops unfortunately.
By loop you mean attributes declared by DTD as IDREFs and pointing to
element having
Andy Wardley wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
I just have yet to see someone point at one place
where Perl 5 hinders XML processing in such a way that Perl 6 could help.
(...)
So instead of writing Perl programs to parse and manipulate XML, it
should be possible to modify Perl itself so that it
Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 4:47 PM +0100 3/26/03, Robin Berjon wrote:
Fast and efficient graphs of all sorts would be very useful. A way to
define a complex graph of interlinked arbitrary objects while being
reasonable on memory and good with GC would be a definitive big win,
especially if it can
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 05:02:00PM +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
Ask the people that use them?
Didn't there used to be a stdlib mailing list for discussing this
stuff?
Yes, and it had even started well by trimming a long list of suggestions one by
one (I think Nat w
Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
To answer a question you asked on an earlier thread, this is one of the
ways that Perl makes doing XML difficult.
Q: "What's the right CPAN lib to pull for parsing/rewriting XML?"
A: Look, we've got a
ugh though, most XML tree representations aren't really trees,
they're very cyclic. Some automata can treat a stream of events as a B-Tree
being visited, but those are rather rare currently.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
adopted it, and in fact we're
better equiped to use it than say the Java folks. Those that didn't like it have
created alternatives. *shrug* Perl as usual.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Andy Wardley wrote:
Robin Berjon wrote:
But as someone that also had to parse other people's random
formats before we had XML, I would like to stress strongly the fact that
the current situation is *much* better than it was.
True, but you're also missing the point that XML is a fest
ave nothing that would be Perl 6 specific.
There's a friendly perl-xml list to expose issues and solutions you may have.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If it is creating a /toolset/ to make recuperating data from a
quasi-XML (aka
tag soup) then it is an interesting area of research. I can think of
two approaches:
- have a parametrisable XML grammar. By default it would
Either way, I really think it shouldn't be called P6ML.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
; files becomes popular.
Just because MS has one broken tool (surprise!) doesn't mean there's no
'commitment to "doing XML"'. There is much commitment, including from MS, and
people very rarely use XML-like formats.
We are going OT *very* fast.
--
Robin Berjon <[
tial absence of) issue, see my other post.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp://expway.fr/
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE 8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
ever that that needs to happen at the p6l level. We can already make
very cool stuff using p5, and the grammar stuff in p6 ought to make the sort of
while loop Tim Bray describes quite certainly doable as well.
--
Robin Berjon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Research Engineer, Expwayhttp:/
Few things in Java are more painful than the int/Integer, etc dichotomy and the
fact that whatever accepts Object cannot take a primitive, and that what expects
a primitive can't take its corresponding object. It would imho not be
conceivable to not have auto-promotion here, lest we lose muc
At 17:33 12/02/2001 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 11:28 PM 2/12/2001 +0100, Robin Berjon wrote:
>>Couldn't we simply (for non-implementer values of simply) provide a way for
>>people to ask for finalization on an object ? Given that most of the time
>>it isn't nee
At 15:37 12/02/2001 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>It *is* rare in OO perl, though. How many of the variables you use are
>really, truly in need of finalization? .1 percent? .01 percent? Less? Don't
>forget that you need to count every scalar in every array or hash, and
>every iteration over a blo
At 16:16 09/02/2001 -0500, Ken Fox wrote:
>The general rule is the more space you "waste" the faster the collector
>is. If you have memory to spare, then don't run the garbage collector as
>often and your program will spend less total time garbage collecting.
>In other words, the collection cost p
At 08:36 04/10/2000 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>This RFC should either be retracted, or revised into:
>
> POD to XML translation should be easier
On this subject, I have notes about a Pod::SAX module that would make
pod2xml much easier. If I have time to implement it I'll do it, but I can't
tel
At 10:59 03/10/2000 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Complex things should not be done in POD.
Indeed. This debate has been done to death. Have any of the would-be
pod-killers read the thread at
http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/perl5-porters/1999-08/thrd11.html#0
1078 ? The thread eventually di
At 16:24 03/08/2000 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>Is it at all possible to define interfaces for tie-ing that would
>facilitate stacking? Do we care?
I think we should care, notably for tied handles. It would be very useful
to be able to pipe ties easily.
-- robin b.
Always remember you're uniq
32 matches
Mail list logo
