Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2006-01-10 though 2006-01-24

Matt Fowles wrote: LuaNil Morphing Klaas-Jan Stol proffered a patch which changed LuaNil from a singleton and made it morph to other Lua types when asked. Warnock applies. Actually, François Perrad applied this patch, but I think he only sent a reply to me.

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-11-14 through 2005-11-21

On Nov 23, 2005, at 3:06, chromatic wrote: On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 01:39 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: But my argument was: whenever you start introspecting a call frame, by almost whatever means, this will keep the call frame alive[1] (see Continuation or Closure). That is: timely destruction

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-11-14 through 2005-11-21

On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 01:39 +0100, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > But my argument was: whenever you > start introspecting a call frame, by almost whatever means, this will > keep the call frame alive[1] (see Continuation or Closure). That is: > timely destruction doesn't work for example... Destruct

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-11-14 through 2005-11-21

On Nov 22, 2005, at 1:40, Matt Fowles wrote: Call Frame Access Chip began to pontificate about how one should access call frames. Chip suggested using a PMC, but Leo thought that would be too slow. No, not really. It'll be slower, yes. But my argument was: whenever you start int

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-10-10 through 2005-10-24

"Matt Fowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: =head3 Obsolete Win32 Exports Michael Walter found and removed some obsolete Win32 Exports. Jonathan Worthington applied the patch. Weren't we planning on auto generating these? The Plan is to mark functions that are to be exported with something that

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-09-26 through 2005-10-02

On Oct 5, 2005, at 1:17, Matt Fowles wrote: Here Doc in PIR Will Coleda revived a thread from February about PIR here doc syntax. Looks like the syntax is ok. Jonathan Worthington has already implemented here doc syntax. Data::Escape::String Dislikes Unicode Will noticed

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-08-15 through 2005-08-22

On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 09:43:41PM -0400, Matt Fowles wrote: > >Java on Parrot > Tim Bunce asked some preliminary questions about Java on Parrot. I > provide preliminary answers, and Nattfodd and Autrijus posted links to > related work. The important question of what it should be c

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-08-15 through 2005-08-22

On Aug 23, 2005, at 3:43, Matt Fowles wrote: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-08-15 through 2005-08-22 Java on Parrot I vote for "Jot". That's already occupied by another language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iota_and_Jot. Perl 6 Language Type Inferencing in Perl 5 Autrijus

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-07-05 through 2005-07-12

Dave Whipp skribis 2005-07-13 8:44 (-0700): > > Within a method or submethod, C<.method> only works when C<$_ =:= > > $?SELF>. > >C<.method> is perfectly legal on *any* topic anywhere that $?SELF > >doesn't exist. > Just to be clear, this includes any method/submethod with an explicitly > named

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-07-05 through 2005-07-12

Damian Conway wrote: Important qualification: Within a method or submethod, C<.method> only works when C<$_ =:= > $?SELF>. C<.method> is perfectly legal on *any* topic anywhere that $?SELF doesn't exist. Just to be clear, this includes any method/submethod with an explicitly named invo

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-07-05 through 2005-07-12

Matt Fowles summarized: Method Call on Invocant Now " ./method "is gone, and " .method " only works when " $_ =:= $?SELF ". Important qualification: Within a method or submethod, C<.method> only works when C<$_ =:= $?SELF>. C<.method> is perfectly lega

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-06-21 through 2005-06-28

On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 08:11:24PM -0400, Matt Fowles wrote: >Parrot Loses with Fedora Core 4 > Patrick reported that Fedora Core 4 and Parrot don't get along well. Leo > suggested a possible solution. No response from Patrick. An update: Patrick submitted a patch based on Leo's sug

Re: Perl 6 Summary... p6rules

On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:58:12PM -0400, Dino Morelli wrote: > Thank you for the summary, Matt > > I have a correction, though: > > > subrules tests > >Dino Morelli provided a patch adding tests for subrules to PGE. Warnock > >applies. > > > > > > This and my o

Re: Perl 6 Summary... p6rules

Thank you for the summary, Matt I have a correction, though: > subrules tests >Dino Morelli provided a patch adding tests for subrules to PGE. Warnock >applies. > > This and my other two patches to p6rules tests (RT #35950, 35971, 35994) have not yet been applie

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-04-26 through 2005-05-03

On Tue, 3 May 2005, Matt Fowles wrote: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-04-26 through 2005-05-03 ^^ ^^ Wow! Michele -- Why should I read the fucking manual? I know how to fuck! In fact the problem is that the fucking manual only gives you theoretica

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-04-12 through 2005-04-19

On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Matt Fowles wrote: Python on Parrot ^^ Kevin Tew wondered what the state of pyrate was. Sam Ruby provided a general explanation. (I'm not on all of the lists, so this may have come out before and I j

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-03-07 through 2005-03-22

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: pugs too lazy Miroslav Silovic noticed that closing a file handle in pugs did not force all the thunks associated with the file. While this was a bug in pugs, it led to conversation about whether = should be lazy or eager. Larry thinks that it will be safer to

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

On Thu, Feb 10, 2005 at 12:32:21PM +0100, Miroslav Silovic wrote: : [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: : : >>i think so but i can't read larry's mind (nor would i want to! :) : >> : >>XP = extreme programming : >>DBC = design by contract (or even designed by conway :) : >>MP = ?? : > : > : >Modu

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Miroslav Silovic wrote: Modular Programming David I think it's Metaprogramming. :) The only thing that sprung to my mind was "MetaPost"... Michele -- No one can ever predict all of the possible error conditions, of course; as soon as we write idiot-proof code, along comes a bet

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i think so but i can't read larry's mind (nor would i want to! :) XP = extreme programming DBC = design by contract (or even designed by conway :) MP = ?? Modular Programming David I think it's Metaprogramming. :) Miro

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

Uri Guttman wrote: [...] i think so but i can't read larry's mind (nor would i want to! :) XP = extreme programming DBC = design by contract (or even designed by conway :) MP = ?? Modular Programming David

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

John Macdonald wrote: The basic problem is that a junction does not work well with boolean operations, because the answer is usually "sometimes yes and sometimes no" and until you resolve which of those is the one you want, you have to proceed with both conditions. Well, just patch the boolean oper

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

> "MD" == Michele Dondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: MD> On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Larry Wall wrote: >> roadblocks thrown in their way. That's true not only for LP, but >> also for FP, MP, XP, AOP, DBC, and hopefully several other varieties MD> ^^ ^^^ MD> ^

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

On Wed, 9 Feb 2005, Larry Wall wrote: roadblocks thrown in their way. That's true not only for LP, but also for FP, MP, XP, AOP, DBC, and hopefully several other varieties ^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^ 1. 2. Ehmmm... sorry for the ignorance, but... 1. Fu

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 11:57:17AM -0800, Ovid wrote: > --- Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Logic Programming in Perl 6 > > Ovid asked what logic programming in perl 6 would look like. No > > answer > > yet, but I suppose I can pick the low hanging fruit: as a > > limiting

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

On Wed, Feb 09, 2005 at 11:57:17AM -0800, Ovid wrote: : --- Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : : >Logic Programming in Perl 6 : > Ovid asked what logic programming in perl 6 would look like. No : > answer : > yet, but I suppose I can pick the low hanging fruit: as a : > limiting

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

--- Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Logic Programming in Perl 6 > Ovid asked what logic programming in perl 6 would look like. No > answer > yet, but I suppose I can pick the low hanging fruit: as a > limiting case > you could always back out the entire perl 6 grammar and i

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

Michele Dondi wrote: On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Matt Fowles wrote: pipe dreams Juerd wondered if he could mix = and ==> in a sane way. The answer appears to be no. Once you bring in ==> you should stick with it. Huh?!? It doesn't seem to me that the answer is 'no'. In fact C<< ==> >> is supposed

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2005-01-31 through 2004-02-8

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005, Matt Fowles wrote: pipe dreams Juerd wondered if he could mix = and ==> in a sane way. The answer appears to be no. Once you bring in ==> you should stick with it. Huh?!? It doesn't seem to me that the answer is 'no'. In fact C<< ==> >> is supposed to be yet another ope

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03

Matt Fowles wrote: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03 All~ Welcome to a New Year of Perl 6 Summaries. I have been doing bi-weekly summaries over the holiday season, but I plan on returning to weekly ones now. Hopefully "World of Warcraft" won't prevent me, we shall see

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03

Austin~ On Tue, 04 Jan 2005 11:20:25 -0500, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Matt Fowles wrote: > > >Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03 > > > > > > > > s/conses/consensus/g ? Indeed. Let this be a lesson to anyone who would claim that just running spell check is enoug

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03

--- Jon Ericson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > s/conses/consensus/g ? > > I assumed it was a Lisp reference. ;-) contheth? (No, I'm not really *quite* that clueless.) Cheers, Ovid = Silence is Evil http://users.easystreet.com/ov

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03

Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > s/conses/consensus/g ? I assumed it was a Lisp reference. ;-) Jon

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03

Matt Fowles wrote: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-12-20 through 2005-01-03 s/conses/consensus/g ?

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-11-29 through 2004-12-06

On Dec 6, 2004, at 6:27 PM, Matt Fowles wrote: getters and setters John Siracusa wanted to know if Perl 6 would allow one to expose a member variable to the outside world, but then later intercept assignments to it without actually having to switch to using getters and setters i

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-11-22 through 2004-11-29

Matt Fowles skribis 2004-11-29 22:22 (-0500): > Juerd suggested scrapping qx and qw in favor of qq:x and qq:w, which > Larry liked. Credit for this shouldn't be mine, but Larry's, as it's his invention: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Juerd

RE: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-11-08 through 2004-11-15

> -Original Message- > From: Matt Fowles [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 15, 2004 11:27 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Perl 6 Internals List; perl6- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-11-08 through 2004-11-15 > > Perl 6 Summary for 2

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-11-01 through 2004-11-08

At 10:39 PM -0500 11/8/04, Matt Fowles wrote: calling convenctions, traceback, and register allocation Leo suggested a new way to invoke functions which would clean up calling, tracebacks, and register allocation. While such a change would have great aesthetic value, Dan declared it

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

Every once in a while some fascist proposes installing TV cameras in all public places, and I think, "Oh, God! Nothing good can come of this!" and resist heartily. Larry Wall wrote: The only bizarre and inexplicable thing that has occurred to me in the last week is that I fell into a canal in V

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Larry Wall wrote: : No, it means Larry's about to stun us with something seemingly bizarre : and inexplicable which turns out to be a stroke of genius. The only bizarre and inexplicable thing that has occurred to me in the last week is that I fell into a canal in Venice. It wa

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

Larry Wall wrote: On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 09:35:27PM +0100, Matthew Walton wrote: : Austin Hastings wrote: : >Does this mean that we're done? :) : : No, it means Larry's about to stun us with something seemingly bizarre : and inexplicable which turns out to be a stroke of genius. The only biza

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: LW> The only bizarre and inexplicable thing that has occurred to me in LW> the last week is that I fell into a canal in Venice. It was LW> definitely somewhat stunning, but I have yet to figure out how to LW> view it as a stroke of geni

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 09:35:27PM +0100, Matthew Walton wrote: : Austin Hastings wrote: : >Does this mean that we're done? :) : : No, it means Larry's about to stun us with something seemingly bizarre : and inexplicable which turns out to be a stroke of genius. The only bizarre and inexplicab

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Austin Hastings wrote: Yes: no traffic at all for quite a while... Does this mean that we're done? :) By any means... I don't think so! I wonder if this could in any way support what occasionally trolls claim e.g. in clpmisc, i.e. that the Perl community is devoted to the c

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthew Walton) writes: >Austin Hastings wrote: >> Does this mean that we're done? :) > >No, it means Larry's about to stun us with something seemingly bizarre >and inexplicable which turns out to be a stroke of genius. This conjured up an ima

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

--- Matt Fowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joshua Gatcomb accidentally introduced a dependency > on > Config::IniFiles. Since it is implemented in pure > perl he offered to > add it to the repository. Warnock applies. > > http://xrl.us/div3 In the note offering to fix it, I also listed nume

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

Austin Hastings wrote: Michele Dondi wrote: On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, Matt Fowles wrote: Google groups has nothing for Perl6.language between October 2 and 14. Is this really the case? (I had not signed up until shortly before Yes: no traffic at all for quite a while... Does this mean that we're done

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

Michele Dondi wrote: On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, Matt Fowles wrote: Google groups has nothing for Perl6.language between October 2 and 14. Is this really the case? (I had not signed up until shortly before Yes: no traffic at all for quite a while... Does this mean that we're done? :)

Re: Perl 6 Summary for 2004-10-01 through 2004-10-17

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004, Matt Fowles wrote: Google groups has nothing for Perl6.language between October 2 and 14. Is this really the case? (I had not signed up until shortly before Yes: no traffic at all for quite a while... Michele -- Except people don't actually read the documentation, and when the

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Piers Cawley wrote: > Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Piers Cawley wrote: > > > >> Happy birthday to me! > > > > > > Congratulations. > > > >> ... by my turning 35 on the 15th > > > > > > 44 on 16th - yes Sept. > > Congrats to you too. So, should I s

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

Leopold Toetsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Piers Cawley wrote: > >> Happy birthday to me! > > > Congratulations. > >> ... by my turning 35 on the 15th > > > 44 on 16th - yes Sept. Congrats to you too. So, should I start maintaining a birthday database for the summaries? Probably not. --

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

Piers Cawley wrote: > > Happy birthday to me! Congratulations. > ... by my turning 35 on the 15th 44 on 16th - yes Sept. and thanks for the kudos, leo

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

Kay Röpke wrote: > > On Wednesday, Sep 18, 2002, at 17:42 Europe/Berlin, Piers Cawley wrote: > >> IMCC / Mac OS X problem > Have those patches committed, yet? I tried last night (instead of > sleeping...;-)) but failed utterly. No, sorry. I'm still waiting for my imcc 0.0.9 patch to be chec

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

On Wednesday, Sep 18, 2002, at 17:42 Europe/Berlin, Piers Cawley wrote: > IMCC / Mac OS X problem > Leon Brocard (yay! Still batting 100% on this one...) has been > having > problems building IMCC under Mac OS X. The individual .c files all > compile, but bad things happen at link t

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 11:42, Piers Cawley wrote: >> The Perl 6 Summary for the Week Ending 20020915 >> Happy birthday to me! > > Indeed! > > And thank you so much for this. You have a way of taking a tangled mess > of discussion that's even confusin

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-15

On Wed, 2002-09-18 at 11:42, Piers Cawley wrote: > The Perl 6 Summary for the Week Ending 20020915 > Happy birthday to me! Indeed! And thank you so much for this. You have a way of taking a tangled mess of discussion that's even confusing the participants and making it easy to digest (no pun

RE: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 2002-09-01

Hi team., thanx in advance Can you provide me a link or a zip file where i can download perl6 or perl 5.6 for solaris 7 or solaris 8 Would be appreciated.. cheers venkat -Original Message- From: Piers Cawley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2002 4:57 PM To:

Re: Perl 6 Summary For Week Ending 2002-08-25

Piers Cawley wrote: ( a lot ;-) Thanks for this really informative summary. Must be a lot of work. > ... Actually, Leopold was something of a patch monster this week, Of course, you missed all my private mails to Sean WRT imcc & perl6 patches ;-) > If I read his post right, Leopol

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 20020728

pdcawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bugger, I used L and pod2text broke it. > http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10797.html perlpodspec sez you can't use L<...|...> with a URL, and I'm guessing that I just didn't look at that case when writing the parsing code in pod2text because of that. -- Russ Al

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 20020728

On 1 Aug 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The mailing list archives are still not searchable (tell me about it), > but Brent Dax points out that the ever wonderful Google has the "site:" > keyword to do search restriction. I foresee a handy little autobookmark > appearing on my gal

Re: Perl 6 Summary for week ending 20020714

> ..., and someone pointed out that it had a problem > with code like "{ some_function_returning_a_hash() }". Should it give a > closure? Or a hash ref? ... Oh, well now that it's stated this way... (something went wrong in my brain when I read the actual message) It returns a clos

Re: Perl 6 Summary

At 11:03 AM -0600 7/7/02, Thom Boyer wrote: >And thanks for the pointers. I've been out of touch with the Perl >community the last couple of years. It's been exciting seeing how >Perl 6 is shaping up, but I'm having a hard time making up lost >time. The postings to perl6-language often take for

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Sun, 7 Jul 2002, Thom Boyer wrote: : Has there been any indication whether those suggestions have met : with Larry's approval? There will certainly be support for that sort of thing in Parrot, up to and including continuations. Otherwise we cannot hope to host all these other languages. Exac

Re: Perl 6 Summary

Peter Scott wrote: > At 01:54 PM 7/3/02 -0600, Thom Boyer wrote: > >> I'm personally MUCH more interested in Python's generators >> . >> >> A generator is like an iterator in that it can produce >> a series of values. But unlike iterators, when you ask

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002, Ashley Winters wrote: : Creepy. Here's my creepy thought for the day: is there a possibility for a : prototype which would implicitly wrap a sub{} around a passed-in argument? : i.e. lazy evaluation via sub prototype? : : sub check_it_out (&$idx is rw, &$val is rw) { : $

Re: Perl 6 Summary

>But unlike >iterators, when you ask a generator for the next value, it picks up >execution exactly where >it left off when it returned the last value -- i Aren't these what The Damien calls coroutines? Are we getting coroutines (RFC 30, as I recall . . .)? I'm also big on seeing these. Also,

Re: Perl 6 Summary

At 5:07 PM -0700 7/3/02, Peter Scott wrote: >At 01:54 PM 7/3/02 -0600, Thom Boyer wrote: >>I'm personally MUCH more interested in >>Python's generators >>. >> >>A generator is like an iterator in that it can produce a series of values. >>But unlike >>itera

Re: Perl 6 Summary

At 01:54 PM 7/3/02 -0600, Thom Boyer wrote: >I'm personally MUCH more interested in >Python's generators >. > >A generator is like an iterator in that it can produce a series of values. >But unlike >iterators, when you ask a generator for the next value, i

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Wednesday 03 July 2002 12:54 pm, Thom Boyer wrote: > To get a better feel for the weirdness that happens with pass-by-name, > consider this example: > sub check_it_out { > $_[0] = 0; #step 1 > $_[1] = 7; #step 2 > } > > my @a = (0,1,2,3,4); > my $i = 2; > check_it_out($i, $a

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Tue, 02 Jul 2002 10:36:45 -0700, Erik Steven Harrisan wrote: ESH> my $a = 'foo'; ESH> ESH> pass_by_name ( sub { print $a} ); ESH> ESH> sub pass_by_name { ESH> my $a = 'bar'; ESH> &@_[0]; ESH> } ESH> ESH> Now, I have trouble keeping Perl 6 and 5 straight, but what

Re: Perl 6 Summary

At 4:19 PM -0400 7/2/02, Mark J. Reed wrote: >On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 09:56:46AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Sean O'Rourke [...] presented "a larger [grammar] that appears to >> capture much more of the syntax found in Apocalypses and Exegeses >> 1 - 4 (5 just scares me)." >O

Re: Perl 6 Summary

At 1:07 PM -0700 7/2/02, Larry Wall wrote: >Are you sure Ruby isn't just using dynamic variables? My information may >be old, but that's all it seemed like to me. A certain amount of confusion >naturally arises in the Ruby world because of the absence of explicit >declaration, so the name bindin

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 09:56:46AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Sean O'Rourke [...] presented "a larger [grammar] that appears to > capture much more of the syntax found in Apocalypses and Exegeses > 1 - 4 (5 just scares me)." On that subject, am I correct that there is no Exegesi

Re: Perl 6 Summary

Are you sure Ruby isn't just using dynamic variables? My information may be old, but that's all it seemed like to me. A certain amount of confusion naturally arises in the Ruby world because of the absence of explicit declaration, so the name binding rules get to be rather complicated. In fact,

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Tuesday 02 July 2002 11:15 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 10:36:45AM -0700, Erik Steven Harrison wrote: > > my $a = 'foo'; > > > > pass_by_name ( sub { print $a} ); > > > > sub pass_by_name { > > my $a = 'bar'; > > &@_[0]; > > } Perhaps a pragma which does: my

Re: Perl 6 Summary

On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 10:36:45AM -0700, Erik Steven Harrison wrote: > > Fortunately, a little research, has clarified a good bit of my question for me. So I >think I can reposit it more clearly. Here goes. > > You all know what pass by reference is, right? And pass by value? Well, Algol 60

Re: Perl 6 Summary

-- On 02 Jul 2002 09:56:46 +010 pdcawley summed: > Ruby iterators > >Ruby interators were the subject of Erik Steven Harrison's post, which >also referred to 'pass by name' and 'the Jensen Machine', and wanted to >know 'the Perl 6 stance on the matter'. Nobody has yet stepped u