From: "Dave Storrs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Chris Hostetter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2001 9:07 PM
Subject: Re: suggested properties of operator results
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> > $v2 = VALUE2;
> > $v1 =
At 09:15 AM 6/12/2001 +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
>Dave Whipp asks:
>
> > Does it do short-circuit evaluation, too?
>
>I would certainly expect it to, yes.
It will, unless Larry specs it out otherwise.
Dan
--"it's l
Dave Whipp asks:
> Does it do short-circuit evaluation, too?
I would certainly expect it to, yes.
Damian
> From: Damian Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 4:06 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: suggested properties of operator results
> I think we will see n-ary comparisons allowed in Perl 6:
>
> if ($x < $y <$z < $foo)
Larry and I recently discussed chaining inequality operators.
He's in favour of it, but not of complex semantics involving
properties and implicit state (as I originally proposed in the
RFC)
I think we will see n-ary comparisons allowed in Perl 6:
if ($x < $y <$z < $foo) {...
but as sp
Dave Storrs wrote:
> 2) This feature would be very prone to abuse (makes it easier to
> obfuscate code),
Whoa! Never thought I'd hear that! And computed function calls/adding things
to the namespace at runtime/rearranging the inheritance tree at runtime aren't
"very prone to abuse" !?
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:42:53PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:31:36PM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:34:49AM -0700, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> > >$input = 4;
> > >$bool = $input < 22;# $bool = 1 is valueR(22)
> > >print "ok!"
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:31:36PM +0100, Graham Barr wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:34:49AM -0700, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> >$input = 4;
> >$bool = $input < 22;# $bool = 1 is valueR(22)
> >print "ok!" if $bool == 1; # whoops, '==' is looking at $bool.valueR
>
> Well per
On Mon, Jun 11, 2001 at 01:34:49AM -0700, Chris Hostetter wrote:
>
> For the record, bwarnock pointed out to me that damian allready proposed
> this behavior in RFC 25...
>
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/25.html
>
> That RFC doesn't suggest having the comparison operators set properties
> on t
For the record, bwarnock pointed out to me that damian allready proposed
this behavior in RFC 25...
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/25.html
That RFC doesn't suggest having the comparison operators set properties
on their result -- instead it recomends that "multiple chained comparisons
should b
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Chris Hostetter wrote:
> After reading the Apocalypse & Exegesis articles, and seeing some examples
> of properties and the "is" operator, I'd like to suggest that the
> less-then operator be changed, so it is functionally equivalent to:
>
> $v2 = VALUE2;
> $v1
11 matches
Mail list logo
