Scott Duff wrote:
Actually, I think we need a universal method on scalars that
gives the eigenstates of that value. It might be C<$val.eigenstates>
or maybe just C<$val.states>. The method would work on non-superimposed
values as well, in which cases it would just return a list containing
the val
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:09:37 -0800 (PST), Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How do your read $a ! $b ! $c?
"Neither $a nor $b nor $c".
What? Aren't you able to see this invisible "neither" operator just at
the front? ;-)
/L/e/k/t
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 03:58:57PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Actually, I think we need a universal method on scalars that
> gives the eigenstates of that value. It might be C<$val.eigenstates>
> or maybe just C<$val.states>. The method would work on non-superimposed
> values as well, in which c
Scott Duff asked:
How do we get at the eigenstates of a superposition?
We obviously need another operator!
Actually, I think we need a universal method on scalars that
gives the eigenstates of that value. It might be C<$val.eigenstates>
or maybe just C<$val.states>. The method would work on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Larry Wall) writes:
> : On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:55:24AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> : > Well, I don't believe in "none" since it's really easy to say !any()
> :
> : Does that have any implications for "unless"?
>
> No. "unless" reads well in English. How do your read $a ! $
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 03:30:54PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 01:19:05PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:09 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> > > No. "unless" reads well in English. How do your read $a ! $b ! $c?
> >
> > "nor"? M
If you guys start trying to reserve punctuation for XNOR, the next perl
cruise is going to be through the Bermuda Triangle...
=Austin
--- Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 01:19:05PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:0
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 01:19:05PM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
>
> On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:09 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
> > No. "unless" reads well in English. How do your read $a ! $b ! $c?
>
> "nor"? Maybe it's "$a nor $b"?
oh no! You've said "nor", so now I have have to ask abou
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 01:09 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
No. "unless" reads well in English. How do your read $a ! $b ! $c?
"nor"? Maybe it's "$a nor $b"?
MikeL
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Paul Johnson wrote:
: On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:55:24AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: > Well, I don't believe in "none" since it's really easy to say !any()
:
: Does that have any implications for "unless"?
No. "unless" reads well in English. How do your read $a ! $b ! $c?
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:55:24AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> Well, I don't believe in "none" since it's really easy to say !any()
Does that have any implications for "unless"?
--
Paul Johnson - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pjcj.net
Larry Wall:
# and then I looked crosseyed at the // vs \\ proposals, and I
# realized we have a superposition of / and \ that is spelled "X". :-)
use Perl::Caseless;
print "foo" x 6;#?!?
--Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
@roles=map {"Parrot $_"} qw(embedding regexen Config
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 11:55:24AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> Well, I don't believe in "none" since it's really easy to say !any(), but
> exclusive-or can certainly use the punctuation. Or, actually, I'm currently
> thinking, non-punctuation. I kept thinking to myself that it's a shame
> that x
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 09:58 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
: > Does xor really need the punctuation? Does xor really need to be a
: > primitive?
:
: Though bitwise xor is seldom used for most people, other versions are
: likely to be more
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 10:11:43AM -0800, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> Though bitwise xor is seldom used for most people, other versions are
> likely to be more frequent: the 'superpositional' flavor, for example,
> is likely to have significant meaning. Same with 'none', I expect.
>
> & |
On Monday, October 28, 2002, at 09:58 AM, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
Does xor really need the punctuation? Does xor really need to be a
primitive?
Though bitwise xor is seldom used for most people, other versions are
likely to be more frequent: the 'superpositional' flavor, for example,
is
On Mon, Oct 28, 2002 at 09:41:37AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> : If \ meant xor, and some of the other discussed changes:
>
> I mislike \ for xor, primarily because it doesn't fit into the current
> "escape" mystique of \.
Does xor really need the punc
Since xor is really low frequency, why not make "xor" mean xor?
$zero = $a xor $a;
$a xor= $b;
$b xor= $a xor= $b xor= $a; # Swap'em
@a ^xor= @b; # Is this right?
=Austin
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> : If \ meant xor, and some of the
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
: If \ meant xor, and some of the other discussed changes:
I mislike \ for xor, primarily because it doesn't fit into the current
"escape" mystique of \.
Larry
On Sunday, October 27, 2002, at 12:57 PM, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
.&= .|= .\= <<= >>= - (depending on operants)
s/operants/operands/
Sorry bout that. Typing too fast.
MikeL
If \ meant xor, and some of the other discussed changes:
unary (prefix) operators:
\ - reference to
* - list flattening
? - force to bool context
! - force to bool context, negate
not - force to bool context, negate
+ - force to numeric context
- - force t
21 matches
Mail list logo
