On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 06:53:20PM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > "Rich" == Rich Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Rich> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
> Rich> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
> Rich> other sy
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:24:54 -0800
> From: Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Mail-Followup-To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Content-Disposition: inline
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.20, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> On Thu,
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 10:35:47AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote:
> > - the ability for the programmer to set "limiters" (??better name??)
> > on the junction, which will specify how the junction should
> > collapse--e.g. always collapse to the lowest/highest value that hasn't
> >
> "Rich" == Rich Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rich> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
Rich> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
Rich> other syntax, as:
Rich>foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
Rich> I'm wonderi
Dave Storrs wrote:
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 10:37:10PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
At what moment does a junction actually create all of its states?
Hmm...perhaps a clearer way to say that is "At what
Luke Palmer asked:
Can junctions have methods?
If we decide they can, yes. ;-)
How do you tell the difference between calling a junction's method and
> calling a method on each of its states?
If it's a method of the class Junction (or one of its four subclasses) then it's
a method call on
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 10:37:10PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
>
> my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
At what moment does a junction actually create all of its states?
Hmm...perhaps a clearer way to say that is "At what moment does a
ju
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
> other syntax, as:
>
> foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
>
> I'm wondering whether Pe
> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:15:53 +1100
> From: Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I suspect C may be a method only, so that would be either:
>
>my @foos = states $foos:;
>
> or:
>
>my @foos = $foos.states;
>
> Though, I suppose we might argue that C is as fundamental to Per
At 10:37 PM -0700 12/10/02, Luke Palmer wrote:
Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
...
We have a I language on our hands, people.
Agreed, but this solution doesn't work well for all cases. For example,
what if I want to iterate throug
Luke Palmer wrote:
LP> my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
Actually $foos will be a junction. You could use C to get
each state out of the junction in an array.
my @foos = states $foos;
Luke's right on target (as usual :-). Just one slight niggle. I suspect
C may be a method
> "LP" == Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LP> my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
>>
>> should that be @foos or will it make an anon list of the foos and store
>> the ref?
LP> Actually $foos will be a junction. You could use C to get
LP> each state out of the junct
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 00:43:13 -0500
>
> > "LP" == Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> LP> Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
>
> LP> my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
> "LP" == Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LP> Why use regexen when you can just use junctions?
LP> my $foos = 'foo' ~ any(0..9) ~ any(0..9);
should that be @foos or will it make an anon list of the foos and store
the ref?
LP> We have a I language on our hands, people.
i k
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:38:58 -0800
> From: Rich Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.20, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
> that allows me to generate
> Mailing-List: contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]; run by ezmlm
> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:07:34 -0500
> From: Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Content-Disposition: inline
> X-SMTPD: qpsmtpd/0.20, http://develooper.com/code/qpsmtpd/
>
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, R
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
> other syntax, as:
>
> foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
>
> I'm wondering whether Pe
> "RM" == Rich Morin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RM> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
RM> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
RM> other syntax, as:
RM>foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
RM> I'm wondering
On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
other syntax, as:
foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
I'm wondering whether Perl should have a similar capability, using REs.
-r
--
email: [EMAIL PROTE
19 matches
Mail list logo
