ratchpads which are related to the continuation. It doesn't just save all
data generally or $foo (from the example) would never really get decremented.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | From the Tom Swifty collection:
Southern Adventist University| "The bank doesn'
t; }
>
> Does anyone agree that `nobreak' reads much better than `skip'?
"skip" was uncomfortable when I read it (I at first took it to mean "skip over
the following" rather than "skip to the following"), but I find "nobreak" also
a bit st
outer". What's the chance that it could
be considered so?
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
There is n
Thus it was written in the epistle of Piers Cawley,
> In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
>
> @ary[0] = foo()
Scalar, I would think.
Just my guess,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | From the Tom Swifty collection:
Southern Adventist U
constraint why not the underscore.
Because there is conceptual dissonance between the purpose and the look. Why
should the thing which glues strings together require spaces around it?
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | From the Tom Swifty collection:
Southern Adventist University| &qu
ted a Closing Bracket, there may be
someone out there who prefers having the compiler object to the missing bracket
rather than have it attempt to run the code, assuming that the ; is really
*not* the end of the statement. 'Course, it has long been held that *any*
random sequence of characters i
terpreters. So, in the it coul parse Python and, wait for it, produce
bytecode which would run on the Python interpreter--except more slowly than
actually using Python ;-).
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), In
ted:
sub if3 ($&&&) {
return &{$_[1]} unless $_[0];
return &{$_[2]} if $_[0] < 0;
return &{$_[3]};
}
gives the functionality. A little more research (and perhaps a quick
coversation with Damian Conway) shoud result in the desired syntax.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL P
t way, "the #! thing" would suffice for normal code and one could just
perl6 -e 'whatever;'
for one-liners.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
Mathema
e core functionality, such as time()
or print() will be on the list by default any any mechanism which adds to the
list can fail on conflict.
I don't think we want a mechanism which, when I type parm() (meaning to have
typed param()) goes out and searches CPAN, downl
uot;Surf to perl dot org and read the new ..."
>
> =Austin
Just to be absolutely certain, could you say that again, using www.perl.com
as the example?
Thanks,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
===
double-punctuation form ($$ and so on) and use instead the
${$} form, it would be an equal number of characters and fewer curlies (which,
I think, is a win).
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
=
icular solution, I agree that that is confusing and ugly. Even once I
got my brain around what it all means, it still looks downright ugly as far as
I'm concerned. Anyone have solutions to that?
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
=
a are
> shared. A consistent epoch would fix this.
Well then, why 1970? If we're defining our own, why buy into one which is
scheduled to blow up in 2038? Why not at the very least start with Jan 1, 2K?
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Sou
g did it take before you could read your
native language? Years. But it doesn't seem so difficult now. Why do folks
feel that if they have to put out a little effort to learn something that it's
a horrible thing?
s for all the other
> data types.
Better yet, DWIM. If I write
print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]";
and no array @southern exists, I probably mean I want it to print
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd say, if the variable exists, interpolate it. If not, print it as
it stands.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton
Thus it was written in the epistle of Steve Simmons,
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2000 at 05:53:44PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
>
> > I'll take that as my cue ;-).
>
> Ah, nothing like a man who knows when to pick up his cues.
:-)
> > <*shudder*> This who
an to sing the whole thing over again?
:-),
Ted
P.S. Seems to me that while putting hooks in the core to allow this sort of
thing might be worthwhile, infinite lists are not likely to be commonly used
and so probably should go into a module.
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL
of the list (see RFC 76). The domain could be
> specified explicitly, or could in some cases be derived by Perl implicitly
> from the context of the expression.
I'm looking forward to the upcoming writeup :-).
Ted
--
Te
s it's
mirage of C and B has it's mirage of C, even if they loaded the same version,
and main has no access to either.
I happen to have a profiler out there which uses the DB package. What happens
if s
John Porter replied to what
> Ted Ashton wrote:
> > John Porter:
> > >
> > > What would be the output of the following program:
> > >
> > > $\ = "\n";
> > > $i = 0;
> > > for ( .. -1 ) {
> > > $i++
t;;
$i = 0;
for ( .. -1 ) {
next unless $_ > -10;
$i++;
last if $i > 2;
print
}
is supposed to print
-9
-8
How it would
Thus it was written in the epistle of Peter Scott,
>
> I do not want a language designed by a committee, or even a
> democracy. This is art, not politics.
Preach on, brother!
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist U
nt one is new to me and I hadn't thought much
about it. Do you have a suggestion?
> but the overall flavor seems good to me. a very smart chomp. boy, just
> think if simple chomp gets this smart, what the hell will happen to some
> of the more complex ops? they will be damianed!
associated with the filehandle.
two-argument chomp():
does as above, but using the second argument (which is a scalar, not a
regex)
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
Thus it was written in the epistle of Brust, Corwin,
>
> From: Ted Ashton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> I don't particularly mind the last two - in fact they add some benefits
> >> (like not modifying the original), which are nice to have. However, that
> >&
ing global $/ and $\, each filehandle has their's
> defaulted to something reasonable.
I think that the point of the global $/ and $\ was to define "reasonable."
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
===
ill have to emulate the functionality somehow.
chop() does not, I believe, either suffer from the $/ problem or stand as an
obvious candidate to join in this proposal. After all, there *are* uses for
the return value of cho
The below
are acceptable, I suppose (with the last, perhaps, being somewhat easier
to understand than its alternative) but they aren't necessary.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
===
roposal was to make
while (chomp()) { ... }
work like
while () { chomp; ... }
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
Most of the fundamental ideas of science are
hich don't have private $/.
>
> i like the ability to set global defaults here.
Hear, hear! Chomp (which I still consider a useful critter :-), needs a
$/ sort of thing to know what to chomp and the lines it chomps may or may
not have come from a given file.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([E
I'm proposing that we change that.
:-),
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
Do not worry about your difficulties in mathemati
l6 won't be a different language.
"Improved", yes, "New", no. There will be some syntax changes and some things
will work differently, but if something is "_dead_ handy" it needs to be at
least that handy when we get done :-).
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([
to me. After all, as I had pointed out to me,
while()
means
while (defined($_ = ))
not
while ($_ = )
even if the chomp() is handed an empty line, it will return a defined value.
Only at the point at which returns undef will the while cease.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info
Thus it was written in the epistle of Bart Lateur,
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 10:03:28 -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
>
> >If we've decided that chomp isn't going to return the clippings, would it not
> >seem prudent to make
> > while (chomp())
> >
> >work
u very much.
Ted "really glad we have DC on our side--
he'd be downright dangerous elsewhere :-)" Ashton
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
There are thre
would need a last; to break out;
>
> Long and bitter experience indicates that fallthrough is a poor default
> (but a good *option*).
Righto. Well said,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
=
ering that the one ^Form
got its name from the other orm and that orm *worked*!
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
If we possessed a thorough knowledge of all the parts
homp isn't going to return the clippings, would it not
seem prudent to make
while (chomp())
work like
while ()
(with the expected difference, of course). After all, "while ()" is
special-cased already.
Ted
--
Te
y against it, though I'd be truly
sad to see them go. After all, that's one of the cool things--no other
language I've ever seen uses the latter at all and, well, it's one of the
things which makes Perl fun. Has having $ and its riends caused trouble
for you?
Ted
--
Ted
quick hacks, this is a pain and
from my experience with English.pm, I had to spend just as much time looking
up which word I have to use as I ever did looking up which punctuation.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adv
chop get used? The confusion
would cleared up considerably, I think, if they didn't return a value.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
One of the endlessly alluring a
to be
in the ease-of-learning vs. power issue. It is even more difficult when trying
to decide where to be in a system one is not writing oneself which will be
learned by students one is not teaching.
In this case, I *think* that the learning curve is worth the advantages of
having the symbol
ot;I put in my time as a parlimentarian" Ashton
P.S. There's also usually some discussion before the motion (we've had that)
and after a bit the chair (K.) says, "could someone word that as a motion?"
So far I think Robert would be comfortable :-).
Skud, keep up the good
're actually
> doing is putting somebody else down by disparagement. As soon as
> you come to see this usage for what it is, it will rankle you
> forevermore.
>
> Just something to be on guard against. One might try to find a
> less offensive term--unless, of course, you mean
Thus it was written in the epistle of Tom Christiansen,
>
> What about regexes?
>
> $foo = qr/blech/;
>
> Should that be /foo instead? :-)
>
> Notice how even objects use $, not something else.
<*chuckle*> Ok, point conceded.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL P
Thus it was written in the epistle of Jon Ericson,
> Ted Ashton wrote:
> > Thus it was written in the epistle of Tom Christiansen,
> > > Nope. A filehandle is a singular whatzitz. It thus mandatory takes
> > > the singular prefix; to wit, $. What's next? Int
Thus it was written in the epistle of Michael Mathews,
> Ted Ashton wrote:
> > The qc()
> > proposal fits in well with the Perl "look-and-feel" and seems pretty
> > comfortable to me. If there are concerns about obfuscatory potential, a
> > use strict
e they're talking about two different gadgets. Letting
* be another kind of singular whatzitz is a reasonable thing. Think of it as
singular and plural nouns and verbs if that helps :-) (and yes, I know that
analogy doesn't fit very well, so save your fingers on that one :-).
T
y one type of data is like
saying that we can't use 'use' for more than one use.
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
... There can be no doubt about faith a
were flexible about delimiters, those who prefer /* */ could
write
qc/* Here is a comment */;
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
The age of chivalry
e code, I think
that we could pretty easily write a converter which would remove the 'my' for
my variables and add a 'dynamic $variable' for the ones which need it,
reaching well over the 80%.
Just my guess,
Ted
--
a Larry-emulator,
a task which p5p pretty-well established as impossible. Somebody needs to
tell Larry that he can't get out of being dad to this kid even if it has
grown up a little :-).
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Info Sys, Southern Adventist University
==
Although the Perl Slogan is There's More Than One Way to Do It, I hesitate to
make 10 ways to do something. :-)
If you want to program in C, program in C. It's a nice language. I use it
occasionally... :-)
I know it's weird, but it does make it easier to write poet
and the two of you lead the pack in knowledge both
of natural language per se and of Perl's connection to it.
Would you be willing to give us a first shot at what Perl *is* to get the
discussion going?
Thanks,
Ted
--
Ted A
this come from. I use formats regularly and quite
> > usefully.
>
> I agree 100%. If it was possible to agree more than 100% I would.
I'm not sure what more there is to say--formats are very common in my code as
well. They were, after all, a big part of why Perl was created in
56 matches
Mail list logo
