Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whispered: | Simon Cozens writes: | : On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote: | : > : while ($STDIN) { ... } | : > I'm wondering what this will do? | : >$thingy = $STDIN; | : > This seems to have t

RE: Apoc2 - concerns

> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 01:25:51PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: > > There must be some reason why a language like Sather isn't more popular. > > I think that iters are part of the problem. > > That smacks of the Politician's Syllogism: > Something is wrong. > This is something. > Theref

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

> Perhaps it's because the people who are capable of writing such a > module, are the ones who don't need it. But, not everyone is a conway. Immortality at last...I appear to have become a common noun. ;-) Damian

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Mon, 14 May 2001 12:39:11 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >I think the more immediate problem with Sather is that it's totally obscure. >I'd never heard of it. I'd never read any articles about it. It has no >publicity. If people haven't heard of it, it'll remain unpopular.

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 01:25:51PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: > There must be some reason why a language like Sather isn't more popular. > I think that iters are part of the problem. That smacks of the Politician's Syllogism: Something is wrong. This is something. Therefore this is wro

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Thu, 10 May 2001 17:15:09 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >> What you could do, is treat an iterator as "something similar to reading >> a line from a file". Tied filehandles allow something like it in Perl5. > >You know, if what you say is true, I'd expect to find a module on CPAN which >turns the

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Fri, 11 May 2001, Larry Wall wrote: > Dave Storrs writes: > : calling the function that produced the string, or whatever. I just think > : that we could extend 'x' to have a general repetition meaning. > > I think just patching one operator from verbal status to adverbial > status is not s

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Dave Storrs writes: : Hmmm...I see your point, but I think it depends on what you see as : the operatee that 'x' is operating on. If it's the string(s) produced by : <>, then you're certainly right. But if it is the act of iterating : itself, then I think my suggestion is still valid. And

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Thu, 10 May 2001, Larry Wall wrote: > Dave Storrs writes: > : should stick with <>. Also, I'd prefer to use the 'x' operator for > : specifying multiples: > : > : @foo = <$STDIN> x 4; > : @foo = <$STDIN> x &mySub; > : > : The parallel with "$foo = 'bar'x2;", where bar is simpl

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

how to pull the next four lines out of a file handle in way new syntax, Larry Wall wrote: > > Dave Storrs writes: > : < QUOTE LARRY > > : Dave Storrs writes: > : @foo = $STDIN * 4; > : > : Larry What's wrong with old-fashioned autoextending array slices that now DWIM splice @foo,

Perl6 MOP (was RE: Apoc2 - concerns)

John Porter wrote: > Larry Wall wrote: > > We do have to worry about the C loop control function though. > > It's possible that in > > > > FOO: while (1) { > > next FOO if /foo/; > > ... > > } > > > > the C label is actually being recognized as a pseudo-package > > name! The loop

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Dave Storrs writes: : < QUOTE LARRY > : Dave Storrs writes: : : You know, it would be really cool if you specify the number of : : lines you wanted like so: : : : : <$STDIN # One line : : *<$STDIN# All available lines : : *4<$STDIN

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

< QUOTE LARRY > Dave Storrs writes: : You know, it would be really cool if you specify the number of : lines you wanted like so: : : <$STDIN # One line : *<$STDIN# All available lines : *4<$STDIN # Next 4 lines : : Or even: :

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

> The RFC pleads for a community spirit from ORA. Barring that, it seeks a new > symbol for the community entirely I'd suggest a mongoose - eats poisonous snakes for breakfast. There's a sort of tie-in with Perl Mongers == Perl Mongoose as well :-) Dave.

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 05:56:41PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: > People are *very much* familiar with reading a line from a file. People > may steer clear from a language because it deeply relies on exotic stuff > like iterators. > ... > What you could do, is treat an iterator as "something similar

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 05:56 PM 5/10/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: >On Fri, 4 May 2001 18:20:52 -0700 (PDT), Larry Wall wrote: > > >: love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an > >: explicit readline to a variable other than $_ > > > >It would be $FOO.next, but yes, that's the basic idea. I

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Dave Storrs writes: : You know, it would be really cool if you specify the number of : lines you wanted like so: : : <$STDIN # One line : *<$STDIN# All available lines : *4<$STDIN # Next 4 lines : : Or even: : : *$num_l

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Fri, 4 May 2001 18:20:52 -0700 (PDT), Larry Wall wrote: >: love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an >: explicit readline to a variable other than $_ > >It would be $FOO.next, but yes, that's the basic idea. It's possible >that iterator variables should be more synta

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Dave Storrs wrote: > *4<$STDIN # Next 4 lines > *$num_lines<$STDIN # Numifies $num_lines, gets that many > *int rand(6)<$STDIN # Gets 0-5 lines > *&mySub($bar)<$STDIN# mySub returns num, gets that many Shades of printf... -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, 8 May 2001, Larry Wall wrote: > In this view, * and < could just be two different kinds of "expandable" flags. > But I'm uncomfortable with that, because I'd like to be able to say > > lazy_sub(<$STDIN, <$STDIN, <$STDIN, <$STDIN) > > to feed four lines to lazy_sub without defeati

RE: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

/me likes. /me likes a lot. David T. Grove Blue Square Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Dave Hartnoll [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2001 8:56 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Apoc2 - concerns :

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

(apologies if this is a duplicate - I think my last post has gotten lost). > The RFC pleads for a community spirit from ORA. Barring that, it seeks > a new symbol for the community entirely I'd suggest a mongoose - eats poisonous snakes for breakfast. There's a sort of tie-in with Perl Mongers

RE: Re[2]: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

> As my Con Law professor was fond of saying, "Horse hooey!"* Camel cookies. ;-) > These types of issues are not nearly so clear cut as many company's > would have people believe. E.g., O'Reilly is book publisher that > engages in the business of publishing and selling books for a > profit. T

Re[3]: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

A. C. Yardley writes: > taken off list. (I don't mean to arrogant the decisional authority Erh, make that arrogate ... /acy

Re[2]: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

David Grove writes: > Probably not if it had scales, webbed feet, a hookbill, antennae, a furry > coontail, and udders. Otherwise, if it looks like a camel at all, it's > considered a trademark violation. I remember someone (whether at O'Reilly or > not I don't remember) saying that, even if it l

RE: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

"Core Perl" is probably trademarked to Sun Microsystems. ;-) David T. Grove Blue Square Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: John L. Allen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 1:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

On Wed, 9 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote: > Beginning Perl was going to use a blown-up microscope slide of a grain > of sand - the beginnings of a pearl. Of course, nobody would have got > it, so we went with a cat instead, which is even more oblique. Hmmm, I suppose a blown-up grain of sand cou

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

At 04:06 PM 5/9/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:02:52AM -0400, David Grove wrote: > > oyster/clam/mussel shell "with association to the Perl language". The first > > thought is to give a demonstration on how rude holding this type of symbol > > is. > >I think all it wou

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

And there was me thinking the shiny ball must be a camel dropping

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 11:02:52AM -0400, David Grove wrote: > oyster/clam/mussel shell "with association to the Perl language". The first > thought is to give a demonstration on how rude holding this type of symbol > is. I think all it would demonstrate is how flawed the copyright system is. Bu

RE: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

/me ponders the use of a cat in that context... Furball? David T. Grove Blue Square Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Simon Cozens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:55 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sub

RE: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

r an initial snit. I didn't do it because it would have taken $600 to prove a point. David T. Grove Blue Square Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: Bart Lateur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:51 AM > To: [

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 04:50:51PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: > Several perl ports, and at least one book, use a "shiny ball" as a > symbol. > It took me a bit of thinking before I realized what this "shiny ball" > represents. Odd. Beginning Perl was going to use a blown-up microscope slide of a g

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

On Wed, 9 May 2001 10:24:26 -0400, David Grove wrote: >I remember someone (whether at O'Reilly or >not I don't remember) saying that, even if it looks like a horse but has a >hump, it's not allowed. Or was that an alpaca with a llama... > >The RFC pleads for a community spirit from ORA. Barring t

RE: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

D] > -Original Message- > From: RFC850 host name inserted by qmail-smtpd > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David L. Nicol > Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 5:12 PM > To: Larry Wall; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Apoc2 - concerns : new mascot? > > > Larry

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:59:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > > Perl is a highly dynamic language > > An object with exactly one and only one method doesn't sound that > dynamic to me. Three methods, surely: next, last, redo. -- Piers Cawley www.ite

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

> Doubtless Damian could come up with a way to view them as hashes... Well, of course. An iterator is neither pure state nor pure behaviour. It's an inextricable commingling of the two. In other words: an object. So they are *most naturally* viewed as hashes: package Iterator;

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Larry Wall wrote: > > all arrays are iterators of some sort BZZT! HSSS! CLANG! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

David L. Nicol writes: : Larry Wall wrote: : : > Syntactically speaking it's too ambiguous to have both a unary < and a : > bracketing <>. : : Cool. Do we get a > operator to use as an l-value, instead of print? : : >$log = join localtime, 'difficult cramigudgeo'; I don't think so. : >

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 10:23 PM 5/8/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 05:08:58PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > >@foo = ({scalar each %some_tied_hash}); > > > > with the function being called only when you access a particular element? > >I'm still confused. Firstly, this doesn't involve first

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

David L. Nicol wrote: > That also wraps up the "for should have an explicit > iterator access method" thread handily! Just label your loop and > there you are! Well, right. Every loop would have a control object, whether it's nonymous or a-. -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Nathan Wiger wrote: > Perhaps qi() for "interpolate" or something else. coming to Perl from Scheme I recall some distress that I had to create ($j=$i) =~ s/(\$\S+)/$1/ge; instead of what I wanted to do $j=qqq/$i/; so my nomination is for tokens matching /qq*/ to behave like s

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 05:08:58PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: >@foo = ({scalar each %some_tied_hash}); > > with the function being called only when you access a particular element? I'm still confused. Firstly, this doesn't involve first-order blocks, which was kinda what the entire question

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 05:11:52PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > > Can you give me an example ... > > Rather than head off down this time-wasting tangent yet again, That smacks of avoiding the question. Again, do you have a useful example? -- You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Nathan Wiger wrote: > > Truthfully, I've always liked the <>'s (and personally don't think we need a > qw alternative), so I'd rather we stay with: > >$a = <$b>; # same as next $b or $b.next we could generalize the other direction and have angles be a standard shortcut for the "next" met

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

I know it is an annoying and bad habit but I'm still young enough so at first glance I think I know it all. > [billions and billions of] > SYN_A # Return one element regardless of context. > SYN_B # Return number of element wanted by context. > SYN_C # Re

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Nathan Wiger wrote: > > I think Uri's qh() suggestion is the cleanest: me too > And it would make hash declarations cleaner: > >%hash = qh( > foo > bar > jim => 'bob' > var >); > > Plus maybe even a pragma to set the default value: > > use def

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

John Porter wrote: > > Pardon me if someone has already suggested this, but... > Couldn't labels really be (aliases to) iterator objects? > So that > next FOO > really *does* mean > FOO.next > Marvelous! That also wraps up the "for should have an explicit iterator access method

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Larry Wall wrote: > Syntactically speaking it's too ambiguous to have both a unary < and a > bracketing <>. Cool. Do we get a > operator to use as an l-value, instead of print? >$log = join localtime, 'difficult cramigudgeo'; > It's possible we're thinking of iterators wrong here. P

Re: Apoc2 - concerns ::::: new mascot?

Larry Wall wrote: > there seems to be a shortage of three-humped camels. At last! the unencumbered image for the mascot! Could O'Reilly really claim a three-humped camel was an image of a camel, with a straight face?

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > > On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:59:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > > Perl is a highly dynamic language > > An object with exactly one and only one method doesn't sound that > dynamic to me. nonsense! It's got accessor methods too, for everyone who wanted to magicalize "$i

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > Can you give me an example that is i) useful > and ii) reasonably obvious to the untrained eye? If not, I humbly suggest it > has little business being in the "blue-collar language" we call Perl. Rather than head off down this time-wasting tangent yet again, I refer readers

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 09:42 PM 5/8/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 12:58:24PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > > Perhaps Perl 6 will have ordinary blocks that can function as continuations > > to the surrounding list context. > >OK, now you've broken my brain. Can you give me an example that is i)

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 12:58:24PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > Perhaps Perl 6 will have ordinary blocks that can function as continuations > to the surrounding list context. OK, now you've broken my brain. Can you give me an example that is i) useful and ii) reasonably obvious to the untrained ey

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Nathan Wiger wrote: > So < could mean "more" and > could mean "less". That would sure confuse the math subcommunity! ;-) > "more" and "less" could be inverses, "more" reading from the current > position forward and "less" from the current position backwards. This > notion could be generalize

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 01:19 PM 5/8/2001 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote: >* Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/08/2001 09:36]: > > > > Taking history into account is good, though I'd argue that now is the > > proper time to change history, if we're going to change. Perl would > > never have been accepted in the first pla

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

* Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/08/2001 09:36]: > > Taking history into account is good, though I'd argue that now is the > proper time to change history, if we're going to change. Perl would > never have been accepted in the first place had it been too different > from what came before, but

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 12:58 PM 5/8/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Simon Cozens writes: >: On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 03:00:51PM -0400, John Porter wrote: >: > Bit of a digression; but, the dynamicity of a language is in >: > no way implicated by the number of methods in one build-in >: > class. (Besides, this class wi

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Larry Wall wrote: > We're not so far off of a yield-like > method on continuations here... > ... ordinary blocks that can function as continuations > to the surrounding list context. Ah! Now we're talking! -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens writes: : On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 03:00:51PM -0400, John Porter wrote: : > Bit of a digression; but, the dynamicity of a language is in : > no way implicated by the number of methods in one build-in : > class. (Besides, this class will have at least three.) : : Ooh, at least three.

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

[Tom's away at the moment, I'm filling in until he gets back.] -- Asynchronous inputs are at the root of our race problems. -- D. Winker and F. Prosser

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 03:00:51PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > Bit of a digression; but, the dynamicity of a language is in > no way implicated by the number of methods in one build-in > class. (Besides, this class will have at least three.) Ooh, at least three. Again, why special-case a class t

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:59:09PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > It's also supposed to have an implementation. I think those of us who are actually likely to write a single line of code or more should be concerned with that, thank you. -- [It is] best to confuse only one issue at a time.

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > An object with exactly one and only one method doesn't sound that > dynamic to me. Bit of a digression; but, the dynamicity of a language is in no way implicated by the number of methods in one build-in class. (Besides, this class will have at least three.) -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > Then I call Occam's Razor. Perl is supposed to be easy, no? It's also supposed to have an implementation. And to have a consistency level somewhat greater than zero. Also, consider the implications for user-defined control constructs. -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:59:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > Perl is a highly dynamic language An object with exactly one and only one method doesn't sound that dynamic to me. -- Can you sum up plan 9 in layman's terms? It does everything Unix does only less reliably - kt

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > Indeed. And I suspect that the first Perl 6 programmers are Perl 5 > programmers, who know damned well what "next FOO" means. Would it really cause you that much consternation to find, after you've been programming in Perl6 for some months or years, that "next FOO" is actua

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens writes: : On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:47:19PM -0400, John Porter wrote: : > Not that there are any such people. Yet. : : Indeed. And I suspect that the first Perl 6 programmers are Perl 5 : programmers, who know damned well what "next FOO" means. Well, it's certainly the case that "

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:34:25PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > Nothing changes at the syntactic level. Then I call Occam's Razor. Perl is supposed to be easy, no? -- And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No e

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:47:19PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > Not that there are any such people. Yet. Indeed. And I suspect that the first Perl 6 programmers are Perl 5 programmers, who know damned well what "next FOO" means. -- "Dogs believe they are human. Cats believe they are God."

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

From: "Larry Wall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Eric Roode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 11:03 AM Subject: Re: Apoc2 - concerns > Eric Roode writes: > : And, while I'm on my soapbox here, I don't get how <...> is a vast

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > C looks like a method call > > It doesn't, Oh, but it does, to the perl6 programmer who's used to thinking $source.next (or its "indirect object" alternative, next $source ) iterates the iterator in $source. Not that there are any s

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 02:34:25PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > the guy who wants to know why C looks like > a method call It doesn't, any more than "next FOO" looks like a method call in Perl 5 right now. -- > I'm a person, not a piece of property. Happily, I'm both! - Lionel and Stephen Ha

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > I'm sure a "pure virtual base template class" sounds reasonable > to a C++ programmer, but that doesn't mean it's the clearest thing > in the world. :) Nothing changes at the syntactic level. FOO: while ( $cond ) { # FOO is now (an alias to) a loop control o

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 10:32 AM 5/8/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Dan Sugalski writes: >: At 09:32 AM 5/8/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >: >Perl 6 might not put all the elements of @b on the stack as a temporary >: >list. Rather, it might just put \@b marked as expandable. (It might >: >also have to put some kind

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 10:57 AM 5/8/2001 -0700, Peter Scott wrote: >At 10:32 AM 5/8/01 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >>: One of the places I hope to gain some speed is in eliminating flattening >>: and reconstitution of aggregate variables as much as possible. I'm hoping >>: to exploit this really heavily to save both the

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:59:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > > > a syntactic loop control iterator object > > Why? It sounds reasonable to me I'm sure a "pure virtual base template class" sounds reasonable to a C++ programmer, but that doesn't mean it's the clearest thing in the world. :) --

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

John Porter writes: : Peter Scott wrote: : > Even if it has a : > fixed-length prototype, is Perl smart enough to know that it can't be : > called as an object method, bypassing prototype checking? : : Maybe p6 won't have that loophole. It won't, if the type of the object can be determined at

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens writes: : On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:32:24PM -0400, John Porter wrote: : > a syntactic loop control iterator object : : I surely hope you're joking. It could certainly be argued that anything you can put a label on is an object by some definition or other. And certainly it turns in

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Peter Scott wrote: > Even if it has a > fixed-length prototype, is Perl smart enough to know that it can't be > called as an object method, bypassing prototype checking? Maybe p6 won't have that loophole. -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens wrote: > John Porter wrote: > > a syntactic loop control iterator object > > I surely hope you're joking. Why? It sounds reasonable to me (if not necessarily desirable). Perl is a highly dynamic language, I think it could support this. -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 10:32 AM 5/8/01 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >: One of the places I hope to gain some speed is in eliminating flattening >: and reconstitution of aggregate variables as much as possible. I'm hoping >: to exploit this really heavily to save both the memory for the flattened >: lists and the time it

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:32:24PM -0400, John Porter wrote: > a syntactic loop control iterator object I surely hope you're joking. -- I respect faith, but doubt is what gives you an education. -- Wilson Mizner

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Dan Sugalski writes: : At 09:32 AM 5/8/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: : >Perl 6 might not put all the elements of @b on the stack as a temporary : >list. Rather, it might just put \@b marked as expandable. (It might : >also have to put some kind of copy-on-write lock on @b to keep it from : >chan

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Larry Wall wrote: > Ordinary "next" methods don't do a goto. Well, of course, the "next" method of a syntactic loop control iterator object would not be ordinary. :-) -- John Porter

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 09:44:57AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > there seems to be a shortage of three-humped camels. No wonder we're short, they're rather careless with them... The Three-humped Camel: An advertisement once appeared in a Welsh local paper which read: 'Last - one three-humped camel.

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 09:32 AM 5/8/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >Perl 6 might not put all the elements of @b on the stack as a temporary >list. Rather, it might just put \@b marked as expandable. (It might >also have to put some kind of copy-on-write lock on @b to keep it from >changing out from under, depending

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Peter Scott writes: : At 01:51 AM 5/6/01 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote: : >The debate rages on: Is Perl Bactrian or Dromedary? : : It's a Dromedary, it says so in the Colophon. : : But maybe the symbol of Perl 6 should be a Bactrian, with the extra hump : symbolizing the increased power. : : You k

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Lipscomb, Al writes: : --_=_NextPart_001_01C0D71B.8F67C8EA : Content-Type: text/plain; : charset="iso-8859-1" : : : > : > $$STDIN # Return one element regardless of context. : > @$STDIN # Return number of element wanted by context. : > *$STDIN # Ret

qX (was Re: Apoc2 - concerns)

> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: LW> Please pardon my hyperbole. I don't loathe qw() so badly that I LW> want to get rid of it. I merely want to put it in the same status LW> as the other general quote operators that also have a non-general LW> pair of standard quote

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Nathan Wiger writes: : One thing I think we should avoid is as many "special cases" as possible. : This is already why people hate <> currently - because it does both glob() : and readline(). : : I would say that <> having history is actually a good thing. It's a : foundation, really, since readl

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

John Porter writes: : Pardon me if someone has already suggested this, but... : Couldn't labels really be (aliases to) iterator objects? : So that : next FOO : really *does* mean : FOO.next Ordinary "next" methods don't do a goto. Larry

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Eric Roode writes: : >And the fact is, I've always loathed qw(), despite the fact that I : >invented it myself. :-) : > -- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : : : Well, one person's ugly is another person's joy forever. : : Regardless of the aesthetics of q//, qq//, qw//, et al, (a

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

In a fit of insanity, at 10:14 EDT Tue May 8, I wrote: > >9 times out of 100, qw saves a large number of keystrokes. (The >other 1% of the time, ... I hope it's obvious that I meant "99 times out of 100" -- Eric J. Roode

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

At 16:17 May 7, Simon Cozens wrote: >On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 01:14:12PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote: >> I think Uri's qh() suggestion is the cleanest: > >Interesting train of thought, since one of the ideas was that qw() is >ugly and has to go. (Larry's been saying this for nearly two years now, >it

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:47:59PM +, Fred Heutte wrote: > And so there's a bit of a three-dimensional Rubik's Cube > game here to try and rejigger the use of the keyboard to make the > language more efficient and productive and maybe even clean out > some of the accumulated crud out there. h

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens makes a good point in response to my slightly overamped oration on the qualities of dissent. I am seeing most of the current discussion on this list as being brainstorming on details, not painting the vast new blue skies, and that is as it should be. Acknowledging that making change

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

On Mon, May 07, 2001 at 05:14:23PM +, Fred Heutte wrote: > It strikes me as counterproductive to say, "Oh, that's ALREADY been > decided" (with the distinct undertone of "by the way please note > how out of touch you are"), or "That's fine but we're not designing > Perl 5 here" (with the appar

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

Simon Cozens writes: >> However, we are not designing Perl 5. This gets to a theme that is turning into more and more of an irritant in following (and very occasionally participating) in the ongoing discussion here. There seems to be a sense among some participants that certain issues are Off L

Re: Apoc2 - concerns

* Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/07/2001 13:46]: > > > To quote you: > > : http://dev.perl.org/rfc/28.pod > > > > I'm not trying to be a jerk at all, but I think at times we're losing > > sight of the above. > > I hope not, since it was primarily written with you in mind. :) Hmm, that's o

  1   2   >