>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> :
> : Interestingly, this one tweak to the whitespace rule also
> means that we'll
> : be able to simplify the parentheses out of other similar
> built-in constructs:
> :
> : if $foo { ... }
> : elsif $bar { ... }
> : else { ... }
> :
> : whi
Or possibly a universal catch, with the $@.warning and $@.die or
something, so that you can check it.
Ilya
> -Original Message-
> From: David Whipp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 7:25 PM
> To: Perl6-Language (E-mail)
> Subject: catching warnings
>
>
> Per
> -Original Message-
> From: raptor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 1:47 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: LangSpec: Statements and Blocks [first,last]
>
>
> hi,
>
> As we read in Damian Conway- Perl6-notes, there will by a
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Russ Allbery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, September 02, 2001 8:42 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: !< and !>
>
>
> Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Why is it ">=" and not "=>"?
>
> Because in English, it's "less than or equ
> -Original Message-
> From: Bryan C. Warnock [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 5:59 PM
> To: Russ Allbery; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: !< and !>
>
>
> On Saturday 01 September 2001 05:40 pm, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 6:06 PM
> To: Russ Allbery
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: !< and !>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 02:40:40PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > >> How is !< different from >=?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Russ Allbery [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 4:03 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: !< and !>
>
>
> raptor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I was looking at Interbase SELECT syntax and saw these two handy
> > shortc
Though it might prove convenient (just more syntax for more than one way to
do it) it's equivalent to !< == >= and !> == <= , it might be too confusing,
though I myself would think that since != and ne is implemented, !< and !>
would definitely make common sense to implement as well.
Ilya
>
As was mentioned earlier, a closure can as well be a named sub, not
necessarily an anonymous.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Paul Johnson
To: Dave Mitchell
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08/21/2001 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: explicitly declare closures???
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001
Usually the generic way is to send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED], so in your case try
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Patel, Sharad
To: Eric Roode; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 08/21/2001 7:22 AM
Subject: HOw to Unsub
HI Guys
Sorry for this but I need to know how to Unsubscribe
Well guess not, since something like this...
{
my ($a, $b, $c);
$a = \$b;
$b = \$c;
$c = \$a;
}
would definitelly be hard, resource consuming to implement a circular
reference count.
Ilya
> -Original Message-
> From: Sterin, Ilya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent:
-Original Message-
From: David L. Nicol
To: Buddha Buck
Cc: Sterin, Ilya; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: 08/01/2001 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: Circular references
Buddha Buck wrote:
>
> At 01:01 PM 08-01-2001 -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> > Can't we keep
> >info
om: Buddha Buck
To: Sterin, Ilya; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Sent: 08/01/2001 1:18 PM
Subject: Re: Circular references
At 01:01 PM 08-01-2001 -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
>I was just wondering if there will be any solution for the circular
>refernece memory leak (I guess you can call it a pr
I was just wondering if there will be any solution for the circular
refernece memory leak (I guess you can call it a problem). Can't we keep
information on the number of circular references in the SV structure and
then decrement the references count by one + the circular reference count at
the en
in ?:: or any other condition checking block, 0 is true, everything else is
false. I am yet to see why otherwise or any third condition is needed. If
that's then we can have 4 conditions 1,0,-1,undef, and we can keep going.
That is why there are conditions, if you want to check for -1 you must
s
> -Original Message-
> From: raptor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 12:32 PM
> To: Sterin, Ilya; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: if then else otherwise ...
>
>
> I've/m never used/ing "elseif" ( i hate it :") from
What's the point, you can accomplish the same with if/elsif/else. Maybe I'm
not understanding this correctly, but
if (cond)
{}
elsif (cond)
{}
else
{}
Ilya
> -Original Message-
> From: raptor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 9:35 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> S
..., just by incrementing a counter, while comparing to the shortes
array, but I'm wondering if a control variable would yield other benefits
and if nothing else decrease the amount of written code.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: David L. Nicol
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: Perl 6 Language
Sen
\%foo = \%bar is fine with me, it's the "is alias" I was a little worried
about.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: David L. Nicol
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: 'Davíð Helgason '; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '; 'John Porter '
Sent: 07/24/2001 5:45 PM
Subject: Re:
alias(%foo, %bar) is better IMO since it conforms to other functions in
perl.
my %foo is alias = %bar; #seems a little out of scope of the language,
unless more functionality is implemented in that way.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Davíð Helgason
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John Porter
Sent
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 5:50 AM
> To: Sterin, Ilya; 'raptor '; Perl 6 Language
> Subject: RE: array/hash manipulation [was :what's with 'with'?]
>
>
> "
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 5:50 AM
> To: Sterin, Ilya; 'raptor '; Perl 6 Language
> Subject: RE: array/hash manipulation [was :what's with 'with'?]
>
>
> "
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeremy Howard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 8:40 PM
> To: Sterin, Ilya; 'raptor '; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: array/hash manipulation [was :what's with 'with'?]
>
>
> "Ste
s out. Do I still need the values of the longer
list, for one reason or another, or do I want the loop aborted?
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: David L. Nicol
To: Sterin, Ilya
Cc: 'raptor '; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
Sent: 07/20/2001 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: array/hash manipulatio
, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 11:17:13AM -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> > > But this will be flattened, so I would think
> > >
> > > for my($key, $val)(%my_hash)
> > > { ... }
> > >
> > > Would be a great convenience. $ke
No, I don't think you are understanding it correctly. It's not about
looping sequentially, but rather simultaneouly, for comparison purposes.
@foo = (1,2,3);
@bar = (1,2,3);
for my ($foo, $bar) (@foo, @bar) #As the index for @foo increases, so
#does @bar index
ed
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED] '
Sent: 07/20/2001 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: array/hash manipulation [was :what's with 'with'?]
On Fri, Jul 20, 2001 at 11:17:13AM -0600, Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> But this will be flattened, so I would think
>
> for my($key, $val)(%my_hash)
>
But this will be flattened, so I would think
for my($key, $val)(%my_hash)
{ ... }
Would be a great convenience. $key and $val being aliased accordingly.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: raptor
To: Sterin, Ilya; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/20/2001 9:10 AM
Subject: Re: array/hash manipul
Hmmm. Didn't think about that. That would be a nice way, that way you can
manipulate it's behaviour depending with how many aliases you provide.
for my $el1, $el2 ( (@foo, @bar) ) {
print "$el\n"
}
$el1 and $el2 would of course be aliases, right?
But one though might be, what happens if
ce option, in my opinion it's useless, but if
was implemented this could be a way:)
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: 'John Porter '
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/19/2001 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: what's with 'with'? (was: [aliasing - was:[nice2haveit]])
Sterin, Ily
Why would you want it to print Monkey Hero, I would expect $_ to be
localized, rather than global, which could prove more convenient.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Stuart Rocks
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/19/2001 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: what's with 'with'? (was: [aliasing - was:[nice2ha
Agree. I think that with() should only be used with object references only,
and $_ should be set accordingly.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: John Porter
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/19/2001 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: aliasing - was:[nice2haveit]
Sterin, Ilya wrote:
> But I thought t
Well then maybe $_ can be a reference to a multidimensional array or hash,
and temp vars can be access like this.
for ( @foo, @bar ) {
print "$_->[0] : $_->[1]\n";
}
As for hashes it might hold the key, also in an multidimensional array.
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: John Porter
To: [E
I question this too, since as you mentioned with, in my experience works
nicely to reference and object like
with(object)
{
.foo();
.bar();
}
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Mark Koopman
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/19/2001 12:42 PM
Subject: Re: what's with 'with'? (was: [aliasing
Well if you look at the proposed...
$_ = "monkey ";
$foo = "coward";
with ($foo){
print;
print "$_";
}
Would print "coward monkey", which will give you unexpected results if you
are used to having the same output for both, "coward coward".
But I guess the above would not replace
But I thought this was related to more than just with(), so if we have
foreach (1..10)
{
print;
### But if you are trying to use it in a string
print "This is number $_ of 10\n";
### Would now have to be printed as
print "This is number ";
print;
print " of 10\n";
### Which is three extra
Stuart Rocks wrote:
>>
>> C would also make the [variable, alias, whatever]
>> default, but not replace the $_:
>>
>> $_ = "monkey ";
>> $foo = "coward";
>> with ($foo){
>> print;
>> print "$_";
>> }
>>
>> would output "monkey coward".
>okay, "coward" is default but $_ has not been r
How about
print "$a[$_]:$b[$_] for 0..$#a;
or in the p6 case...
print "@a[$_]:@b[$_]" for 0..$#a;
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: raptor
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 07/18/2001 12:14 PM
Subject: one more nice2haveit
hi,
As I was programming i got again to one thing i alwas needed to
Yes but can't the same be accomplished with...
my $myhash = (%{$Request->{Params}});
print $myhash{abc};
Though again it copies the structure, I don't see how dereferencing can be
unclear?
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: raptor
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Sterin, Ilya
Sent: 7/1
-Original Message-
From: raptor
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 7/13/01 10:19 AM
Subject: Re: nice2haveit
>> Two things i think is good to have it :
>>
>> 1. ALIAS keyword.
>> - first reason is 'cause many people don't know that this is
possible.. at
>
$foo = [$one, $two, $three]; # creates an anonymous list.
$foo = [$object method("foo", "bar")];
This would interpret as
$foo[0] == $object, etc...
Ilya
-Original Message-
From: Buddha Buck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2001 11:20 PM
To: Piers Cawley
Cc: Bart
41 matches
Mail list logo
