S99-glossary.pod
Log Message:
---
fix syntax in the advent calendar entry
/index.html
Log Message:
---
various minor casing/spacing/grammar/syntax fixes
◦ unicode→ Unicode [except unicode pragma]
◦ Perl6 → Perl 6
◦ Perl5 → Perl 5 [except Perl5ish]
◦ a → an [before vowel
S07-lists.pod
Log Message:
---
Fix syntax error and add clarification in S07-lists
S99-glossary.pod
Log Message:
---
TBD: Redundant material in grammar/parser/syntax analysis
-library/Exception.pod
Log Message:
---
[S32::Exception] Add X::Syntax::AddCategorial::MissingSeparator
:
M S12-objects.pod
Log Message:
---
Re-purpose the method ^foo(...) { ... } syntax.
The existing design of it was out of line with the way Perl 6 evolved
since then, and also not especially useful. This takes the syntax and
enables its use for per-type meta-behavior specialization
-library/Exception.pod
Log Message:
---
[S32::Exception] Add X::Syntax::Term::MissingInitializer
-setting-library/IO.pod
Log Message:
---
fix minor syntax error
-glossary.pod
Log Message:
---
fixing syntax links line 385
-regex.pod
Log Message:
---
Fix syntax of example <* < foo bar baz > >
Log Message:
---
[S05] Expand information on <|rule> syntax.
Wouldn't want someone thinking that was an exhaustive list, now would
we? :)
-library/Callable.pod
M S32-setting-library/Rules.pod
M S32-setting-library/Str.pod
Log Message:
---
[S32] Use modern return type syntax
-setting-library/Exception.pod
Log Message:
---
[S32::Exception] X::Syntax::NegatedPair should report the key
-data.pod
Log Message:
---
[S09] fix coercion syntax usage, TimToady++
-routines.pod
Log Message:
---
[S06] avoid indirect method call syntax
It is unrelated to the topic, and seem to confuse readers. Me too.
-regex.pod
Log Message:
---
Document possessive quantifier syntax
/Exception.pod
Log Message:
---
[S32/Exceptions] add a few syntax errors
Message:
---
define extensible boundary syntax
The Unicode folks seem to want an extensible boundary syntax with \b,
but we've abandoned \b for boundary, so it's now <|x> for various
values of x. (And is the negation, so no need for <|X>.)
is now <|w>.
Author: lwall
Date: 2010-07-11 18:53:20 +0200 (Sun, 11 Jul 2010)
New Revision: 31624
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod
Log:
[S05] redirect to new char class syntax with patch from cosimo++
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S05-regex.pod
Author: masak
Date: 2010-05-30 16:14:21 +0200 (Sun, 30 May 2010)
New Revision: 30996
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/IO.pod
Log:
[S32/IO] changed a number of instances of C++-style constructor syntax
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/IO.pod
Author: diakopter
Date: 2010-05-20 01:44:05 +0200 (Thu, 20 May 2010)
New Revision: 30722
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S06-routines.pod
Log:
[S06] specify syntax for strongly-typed closure variables (reprise)
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S06-routines.pod
Author: diakopter
Date: 2010-05-20 01:41:19 +0200 (Thu, 20 May 2010)
New Revision: 30721
Modified:
docs/Perl6/Spec/S06-routines.pod
Log:
[S06] specify syntax for strongly-typed closure variables
Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S06-routines.pod
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 11:59:10AM -0800, Mubed wrote:
: Sorry, if it is the wrong group to post this. I'd like to know, if it
: is possible to make some suggestions to the Perl6 syntax.
This is certainly the right place, and we try to give all ideas a
fair hearing. Though given that we&#x
Sorry, if it is the wrong group to post this. I'd like to know, if it
is possible to make some suggestions to the Perl6 syntax.
pugs-comm...@feather.perl6.nl wrote:
> Author: kyle
> Date: 2009-07-04 19:26:48 +0200 (Sat, 04 Jul 2009)
> New Revision: 27404
>
> Modified:
>t/syntax/hyper_latin1.t
> Log:
> [t] Further mutated t/syntax/hyper_latin1.t
>
> Mod
Darren Duncan wrote:
> Jon Lang wrote:
>> Spitballing here: you drew an analogy to the feed operators. I wonder
>> if that analogy could be taken further: use --> and <-- outside of
>> signatures as feed operators - but instead of feeding arrays back and
>> forth, have them feed capture objects an
Jon Lang wrote:
And AFAIK the token --> is used in exactly one place in perl 6: within
signature syntax, to mark the transition from the parameter signature
to the "return type" signature. As with Darren, I don't see why this
would be a big problem. The biggest stumbling bloc
rstand that but I don't know if its a big problem.
>
> AFAIK the token <-- isn't used anywhere yet in Perl 6 and so its presence
> inside a parameterized list would be unambiguous once you've read up to it.
And AFAIK the token --> is used in exactly one place in perl 6
Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 02:18:35PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
Yes, --> is the "of" type, not the "as" type, as S02 I think says.
Good to know.
Second, since the "sub NAME (PARAMS --> RETTYPE) {...}" form looks nice
visually, I would like to request a variant of that form,
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 02:18:35PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote:
> I have a question and a request.
>
> In http://perlcabal.org/syn/S06.html#Named_subroutines it says:
>
> The general syntax for named subroutines is any of:
>
> my RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {.
I have a question and a request.
In http://perlcabal.org/syn/S06.html#Named_subroutines it says:
The general syntax for named subroutines is any of:
my RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# lexical only
our RETTYPE sub NAME ( PARAMS ) TRAITS {...}# also package-scoped
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 09:52:10AM -0800, Patrick R. Michaud via RT wrote:
: On Tue Dec 30 01:47:47 2008, masak wrote:
: > Just wondering whether the following syntax, currently accepted by
: > Rakudo r34628, is legal Perl 6:
: >
: > $ perl6 -e 'say ("a".."c")
On Tue Dec 30 01:47:47 2008, masak wrote:
> Just wondering whether the following syntax, currently accepted by
> Rakudo r34628, is legal Perl 6:
>
> $ perl6 -e 'say ("a".."c").list[0..**-1]'
> abc
As of r34652, this now produces an empty list (which
e of things:
sub infix:
is equiv(&infix:)
is sig(:($x, $y, :$z = $x foo $y bar 1))
{...}
sub infix:
($x, $y, :$z = infix:($x, $y) bar 1)
is equiv(&infix:)
{...}
but I'm inclined to simplify in the direction of saying the signature
John M. Dlugosz 提到:
Does that mean that traits can come before the signature? Or should it
be corrected to
method close () is export { ... }
It's a simple typo. Thanks, fixed in r14572.
Cheers,
Audrey
Does that mean that traits can come before the signature? Or should it be
corrected to
method close () is export { ... }
?
John M. Dlugosz wrote:
> Does that mean there is a tool I can use to apply STD.pm to syntax-check
> my examples or ask questions of it? Can you point to that?
in the pugs repository:
$ cd src/perl6
$ make
$ ./tryfile $filename
That assumes a perl 5.10 in /usr/local/bin/perl
HTH,
Does that mean there is a tool I can use to apply STD.pm to syntax-check
my examples or ask questions of it? Can you point to that?
--John
Moritz Lenz wrote:
Since now STD.pm parses most Perl 6 code now, and spits out a parse tree
in YAML, a brave soul might want to write a syntax hilighter
something only a
crazy person would want to do, but it seems to fall out of the current
syntax, and we tend not to prevent things just to be mean.
: "Alternately, the my declarator can also force treatment of its argument as a
signature."
:
: That would be
:
: my (:who($name), :why($re
:(:who($name), :why($reason)) := (why => $because, who => "me");
What do the symbols $name and $reason refer to? Are they names already in
scope?
"Alternately, the my declarator can also force treatment of its argument as a
signature."
That would be
my (:who($name), :why($reason)) := (why =
multi traverse ( NAry $top ( :kids [$eldest, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) ) {
The inner signature is
:( :kids [$eldest, [EMAIL PROTECTED] )
This starts out like a named-only parameter,
:xx or :xx($yy)
but then there is a space and an array.
:xx @yy
I don't follow that.
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 11:36:09PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
: Yes, but where does resolve down to a typename?
: My reading of STD.pm is that becomes a
: (since it's not a 'where' clause in this case), and is currently
: one of , , or .
Value is supposed to include fulltypename, but I
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 09:18:38PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 03:26:02AM -, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
> : S06 shows how to define named-only parameters, "marked with a prefix :".
> But no example shows anything more than a bare parameter name. No type is
> ever given!
>
On Fri, Apr 11, 2008 at 03:26:02AM -, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
: S06 shows how to define named-only parameters, "marked with a prefix :". But
no example shows anything more than a bare parameter name. No type is ever
given!
:
: Looking through my copy of STD.pm, I'm baffled, as it seems not
S06 shows how to define named-only parameters, "marked with a prefix :". But
no example shows anything more than a bare parameter name. No type is ever
given!
Looking through my copy of STD.pm, I'm baffled, as it seems not to take types
in parameter lists at all.
So, is it
method bytes ( E
well enforce that, and
> drop the <...> around method/regex calls:
>
> regex foo {
> 'literal' subregex
> }
>
> This way we'll approximate "normal" Perl 6 syntax, and maybe even improve
> huffman coding.
>
> I guess such a syntax
I have two questions/suggestions regarding regex syntax:
1)
The :ii modifier is influenced by :sigspace modifier.
IMHO this is ugly, because the matching part and the replacement part of a
regex should be as orthogonal as possible.
Therefore I'd like a different syntax for :ii :sigspace,
und to its value, and
bind the Pair to $cap (causing $obj to be bound to the value portion of
$cap)".
But I was told on #perl6 that :($obj) refers to a Signature. If so, I
think the relevant passage in S02 for deciphering the syntax is:
A signature object (Signature) may be created wi
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 10:32:13AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
: @larry[0] wrote:
:
: >Log:
: >P5's s[pat][repl] syntax is dead, now use s[pat] = "repl"
:
: Wow, I really missed this one! That's a pretty big thing to get my head
: around. Are embedded closures in the s
@larry[0] wrote:
Log:
P5's s[pat][repl] syntax is dead, now use s[pat] = "repl"
Wow, I really missed this one! That's a pretty big thing to get my head
around. Are embedded closures in the string handled correctly so that:
s:g[\W] = qq{\\{$/}};
Will do what I
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:17:21PM +0800, Agent Zhang wrote:
: Hi, all~~
:
: S05 makes widely use of the syntax @{ $capture } and %{ $capture }
: while other synopses remarkably don't.
:
: According to S02, {...} should normall be a closure or a hash
: subscript and S02 uses the s
Hi, all~~
S05 makes widely use of the syntax @{ $capture } and %{ $capture }
while other synopses remarkably don't.
According to S02, {...} should normall be a closure or a hash
subscript and S02 uses the syntax @( $arrayref ) and %( $hashref )
consistently. Is S05 simply out of sync or i
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 03:51:45PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote:
> : { no threads;
> :print @_.»();
> : }
>
> It seems a bit odd to use a construct for its syntactic sugar value
> but take away its semantics...
>
> If you just need ordering, this (o
On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 03:51:45PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote:
: --- Ashley Winters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > On 6/2/06, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > >
: > > my @answer = map { async { &_() } } @jobs;
: >
: > That still seems too explicit. I thought we had hyperoperators to
: > i
--- Ashley Winters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/2/06, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > my @answer = map { async { &_() } } @jobs;
>
> That still seems too explicit. I thought we had hyperoperators to
> implictly parallelize for us:
>
> my @answer = @jobs.»();
>
> Which would
On 6/2/06, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Though if that works, you could squish this example even more, to
class QueueRunner {
our sub process_queue(Code @jobs_in) {
map { async { &_() } } @jobs_in;
}
}# end QueueRunner
# Elsewhere...
my @answer = QueueRunner.process
--- John Drago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
. . .
> > class QueueRunner {
> >our sub process_queue(Code @jobs_in) {
> > my @ans is serial;
> > @ans.push map { async { &_() } } @jobs_in;
> > @ans;
> >}
> > }
> > my @answer = QueueRunner.process_job_queue( @jobs );
>
> Actual
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > my $age = 27 but NOWAIT;
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > TakesForever( $age but NOWAIT );
> > >
> > > (or whatever) then I'd say it should just fail. I mean, isn't that
> > ki
erial ) is async but NOWAIT
> {
> >...
> > }
> >
> > or
> >
> > my $age = 27 but NOWAIT;
> >
> > or
> >
> > TakesForever( $age but NOWAIT );
> >
> > (or whatever) then I'd say it should just fail. I m
t that way if the default is
> WAIT (which seems the smart default to me), the thread waits until
> TakesForever() releases the resource.
>
> if we declare
>
> our method TakesForever ( int $num is serial ) is async but NOWAIT {
>...
> }
>
> or
>
> my
--- John Drago <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Mastros wrote:
> > I don't like the name synchronized -- it implies that multiple
> > things are happening at the same time, as in synchronized swiming,
> > which is exactly the opposite of what should be implied.
> > "Serialized" would be a nice n
in Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:43 AM
> To: perl6-language@perl.org
> Subject: Re: Synchronized / Thread syntax in Perl 6
>
> On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 03:41:06PM -0600, John Drago wrote:
> > class Foo is synchronized {
> > ...
&
James Mastros wrote:
> I don't like the name synchronized -- it implies that multiple things are
> happening at the same time, as in synchronized swiming, which is exactly the
> opposite of what should be implied. "Serialized" would be a nice name,
> except it implies serializing to a serial form
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 03:41:06PM -0600, John Drago wrote:
> class Foo is synchronized {
> ...
> }
>
> our method Bar is synchronized {
> ...
> }
>
> class Baz {
> has $.Bux is synchronized;
> }
To everyone participating in this thread:
There has already been a draft spec for concurrency
le Groups interface a few weeks ago, but I'm
> not sure if it made it here.
> I am asking again in case the question never made it onto the list.
>
> Has the syntax for synchronized/threaded @things been worked out?
> For example:
>
> class Foo is synchronized {
> ...
&
We could always go with the Windows API "Critical Section" name. Locked is
probably as good a descriptor, and avoids anything associated with Windows.
Sage
James Mastros skribis 2006-05-31 12:03 (+0100):
> I don't like the name synchronized -- it implies that multiple things
are
> happening at
James Mastros skribis 2006-05-31 12:03 (+0100):
> I don't like the name synchronized -- it implies that multiple things are
> happening at the same time, as in synchronized swiming, which is exactly the
> opposite of what should be implied. "Serialized" would be a nice name,
> except it implies se
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 03:41:06PM -0600, John Drago wrote:
> I asked this via the Google Groups interface a few weeks ago, but I'm not
> sure if it made it here.
> I am asking again in case the question never made it onto the list.
>
> Has the syntax for synchronized/t
I asked this via the Google Groups interface a few weeks ago, but I'm not sure
if it made it here.
I am asking again in case the question never made it onto the list.
Has the syntax for synchronized/threaded @things been worked out?
For example:
class Foo is synchronized {
...
}
our m
On 11/23/05, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Luke wrote:
>
> > On 11/22/05, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> :syntax
> >> :syntax
> >> :syntax
> >> :syntax
> >> :syntax
>
Luke wrote:
On 11/22/05, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:syntax
:syntax
:syntax
:syntax
:syntax
:syntax
Aren't we providing an interface to define your own regex modifiers?
Sure. But it'd lead to much less namespace pollution
On 11/22/05, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :syntax
> :syntax
> :syntax
> :syntax
> :syntax
> :syntax
Aren't we providing an interface to define your own regex modifiers?
All of these can easily be mapped into Perl 6 pat
Larry wrote:
> But the language in the following lexical scope is a constant, so what can
> :syntax($foo) possibly mean? [Wait, this is Damian I'm talking to.]
> Nevermind, don't answer that...
Too late! ;-)
Regex syntaxes already are a twisty maze of variations, mostly
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:38:19PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
> I have been meaning to do some kind of p5 prototype of this, I can
> push it up the TODO list if it would help you.
As you can probably infer from the amount of time that it has taken for me
to realise that I've failed to reply to
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 11:36:33 -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> If we had some kind of partitioning operator, it'd probably be generalized
> to sorting into bins by number, where 0 and 1 are degenerate cases for
> booleans. But since we'd almost certainly make the general form
>
> (@bin0, @bin1,
On Fri, Nov 18, 2005 at 01:41:33PM -0800, Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > The name is relatively unimportant in the overall scheme of things.
: > I'm more worried about the fact that it's difficult to partition a
: > list into multiple lists in one pass w
gt; > list into multiple lists in one pass without declaring temp arrays.
>
> Didn't the list agree long ago on a `part` builtin? I certainly wrote
> List::Part based on that discussion...
In E06:
($cats, $chattels) = part &is_feline, @animals;
How about a "sw
Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The name is relatively unimportant in the overall scheme of things.
> I'm more worried about the fact that it's difficult to partition a
> list into multiple lists in one pass without declaring temp arrays.
Didn't the list agree long ago on a `part` builtin?
Larry Wall wrote:
> If we had some kind of partitioning operator, it'd probably be generalized
> to sorting into bins by number, where 0 and 1 are degenerate cases for
> booleans.
Cool!
This doesn't solve the general case, but how about a left-side zip:
zip( @keys, @values ) = %hash;
zip( @e
Larry Wall skribis 2005-11-18 11:36 (-0800):
> In Perl 5, to set a slice, you have to write
> %hash{ @keys } = @values;
"@"... :)
> whereas in Perl 6, it'd be nice to be able to say that with all
> the keys and values on the right side somehow.
Shouldn't a simple
%hash = @keys Y @values
LIST;
additional(kv(%bins)) = labelkv { calc_str($_) } LIST;
clobber(kv(%bins)) = labelkv { calc_str($_) } LIST;
or whatever. But it'd be even nicer if we could avoid the pseudofunction
syntax as well. It does seem rather nice to attach the clobber/nonclobber
distinction to the ass
On 11/3/05, Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
>
> >> http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/17556
> >
> > I understand that Perl6 allows blocks with changed/enhanced syntax, so
> > it is or wi
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/17556
I understand that Perl6 allows blocks with changed/enhanced syntax, so
it is or will become possible (to add it) as if it was in the core
language.
Do I understand that right? Something as
robably unreasonable fashion:
>
> http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/17556
I understand that Perl6 allows blocks with changed/enhanced syntax, so
it is or will become possible (to add it) as if it was in the core
language.
Do I understand that right? Something as simple as a 'us
On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 17:12 -0700, Nate Wiger wrote:
> If Perl 6 is going to be successful, this means it must change the
> fewest key things with the most benefits.
I think there's an assumption here that not only do I not hold but I do
not even understand.
Suppose that I am a game developer wi
Feh - I really need to get on gmail's case for providing a keystroke
for "Reply to All".
Rob
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nate Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Oct 21, 2005 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: $1 change issues [was Re: syntax for accessing multiple
versions
On 2005-10-21 1:54 PM, "Nate Wiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW, C and PHP both use -> "still".
C++ is probably more relevant than C, but since it inherited the syntax,
same diff. But in their case the underlying form is still a dot; A->B is
just syntacti
se -> "still".
It sounds like you want a backwards-compatible change. From the
outset we knew that this wasn't our goal. Perl 5 is full to the brim
with syntax, and there's pretty much nowhere we can add anything, and
there's tons of cruft that we had to get rid of.
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 09:14:15PM -0400, John Adams wrote:
> From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > But $1 in Perl 5 wasn't the same as $1 in a shell script.
>
> I'm all for breaking things that need breaking, which is why I
> keep my mouth shut most of the time--either I see the reason or
-Original Message-
From: "Patrick R. Michaud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I can state the compelling reason for this one -- it's way too
confusing when $1, $2, $3, etc. correspond to $/[0], $/[1], $/[2], etc.
>In many discussions of capturing semantics earlier in the year,
nearly everyone usin
On Thu, 20 Oct 2005, Luke Palmer wrote:
Huh? So you want to go back to Perl 5's arrow? *Anybody* coming to
Perl 6 from some non-Perl 5 language is going to be more comfortable
with dot.
(Also, I did like the arrow notation, but) how cool would be
@cool=grep ->cool, @misc; # if compared to
On 10/21/05, Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/21/05, Benjamin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 06:39:34PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > > Huh? So you want to go back to Perl 5's arrow? *Anybody* coming to
> > > Perl 6 from some non-Perl 5 language is goi
On 10/21/05, Benjamin Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 06:39:34PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > Huh? So you want to go back to Perl 5's arrow? *Anybody* coming to
> > Perl 6 from some non-Perl 5 language is going to be more comfortable
> > with dot.
>
> Unless it was Sm
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 06:39:34PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> On 10/20/05, Nate Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Luke Palmer wrote:
> > > The fact that we use . instead of -> (like every other language on
> > > the planet)?
> >
> > You're using my argument for me - thanks. See above.
>
> Huh?
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:12:32PM -0700, Nate Wiger wrote:
> Every regex engine in every language uses $1 or \1. This includes Java,
> JavaScript, C, PHP, Python, awk, sed, the GNU regex libs, etc. Somehow
> other languages seem ok with this, because it's a widely-used convention.
This quibbling
From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> But $1 in Perl 5 wasn't the same as $1 in a shell script.
Sure--but that's not what I said.
I'm all for breaking things that need breaking, which is why I keep my mouth
shut most of the time--either I see the reason or I suspect (that is, take on
faith,
On 10/20/05, John Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then the target audience is specifically not people coming from a
> shell scripting background, who are quite used to the idea that $0 is
> different from $1 in a way in which $1 is not different from $2.
> Correct?
But $1 in Perl 5 wasn't the s
alot of programmers.
Yes, yes.
You seem to be speaking for a lot of programmers, too. We have to,
for if we didn't try, we probably wouldn't be good language designers.
> > The reason I'm dismissing you as a "complainer" is because of your
> > broad field of attac
quot;complainer" is because of your
broad field of attack. You say that "the method syntax is starting to
make [your] head spin". Well, what about it is making your head spin?
The method: infix:<+> stuff makes no sense to me, but I don't want to
dwell on it.
The fact
-Original Message-
From: Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Our target audience is only somewhat from a Perl 5 background. People
from Java, from Python, from C, and even just starting to program will
be learning Perl 6, and they would rather have all the language be
zero-based, rather tha
1 - 100 of 678 matches
Mail list logo
