On Tue, 2004-08-17 at 12:54, Larry Wall wrote:
> But we'll just have to shoot anyone who makes a wisecrack like:
>
> use parens :lisp;
Surely that should have its own pragma:
use parenths;
-- c
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 06:02:13PM +, Smylers wrote:
: David Storrs writes:
: > Just checking--whitespace doesn't count, right?
: >
: > foo(1,2,3);# Func with 3 args
: > foo (1,2,3); # Same exact thing
:
: You quote Larry's text about methods, then give an example using
: functi
David Storrs writes:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 11:07:59AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>
> > 2) In the absence of evidence to the contrary, methods always
> > assume they have *no* arguments. For methods:
> >
> > 2a) A method not followed by a left paren or colon has no
> > argument
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 11:07:59AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>
> 2) In the absence of evidence to the contrary, methods always
> assume they have *no* arguments. For methods:
>
> 2a) A method not followed by a left paren or colon has no
> arguments.
Just checking--whitespace
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 09:19:29PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
: i have no issue with splurt() being needed to disambiguate. i just
: wanted to see your take (this week :) on it as i felt the table was
: ambiguous so far. as far as making it a warning, wouldn't that make the
: warning space sensitive
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 07:05:28PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
LW> : LW> : splurt + 1 # same??
LW> : LW> : splurt +1 # work on +1??
LW> :
LW> : so how do the 2 above get parsed? the space between + and
On Fri, Aug 13, 2004 at 07:05:28PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
: LW> : splurt + 1 # same??
: LW> : splurt +1 # work on +1??
:
: so how do the 2 above get parsed? the space between + and 1 looks alike
: a 0-ary splurt but the +1 could be 0-ary added to 1 or unary with +1 as
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 06:10:17PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
LW> : can you have a 0- or 1-ary function? meaning like the many funcs that
LW> : work on $_ with no args or the single arg you pass in. how do you
LW> : declare it so it p
On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 06:10:17PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
: can you have a 0- or 1-ary function? meaning like the many funcs that
: work on $_ with no args or the single arg you pass in. how do you
: declare it so it parses correctly?
:
: splurt # should work on $_
: splurt
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> 1c) Explicit parentheses may delimit the actual arguments,
LW> in which case the function is parsed as a function rather
LW> than a list operator. Adverbs may follow the parens:
LW> splurt(1,2,3):by{ +$_ } # okay
10 matches
Mail list logo
