Re: RFC 48 (v1) Replace localtime() and gmtime() with da

On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 01:10:23PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote: > > GMT is not UTC (although it is equal for most practical purposes). > > Ok, I'll have to research this a little. I've heard both ways (it is, it > isn't, it's supposed to be...) For me, GMT has no leap-seconds, UTC does. > > since

Re: RFC 48 (v1) Replace localtime() and gmtime() with da

On Sun, Aug 06, 2000 at 11:07:02AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Basically, you don't want to go anywhere near this mess; it eats people. I agree. > I see two reasonable options to go with instead. One is to just use a > binary flag that says use UTC or not; this is the simplest and most > relia

Re: Infinite lists (was Re: RFC 24 (v1) Semi-finite (lazy) lists)

> > Another win is in evaluation of lists constructed by generator functions: > > # ($start: f(__): $end) == ($start, f($start), f(f($start)), ...) > > @powersOf2 = (1:__*2:); # (1, 2, 4, 8, ...) > > @first10PowersOf2 = @powersOf2[0..9]; # Calculates 1st 10 powers of 2 > > # ...interesting

RFC 52 (v1) List context return from filesystem func

This and other RFCs are available on the web at http://dev.perl.org/rfc/ =head1 TITLE List context return from filesystem functions =head1 VERSION Maintainer: Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 6 Aug 2000 Version: 1 Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Number: 52 =hea

RFC 49 (v1) Objects should have builtin string SCALA

This and other RFCs are available on the web at http://dev.perl.org/rfc/ =head1 TITLE Objects should have builtin string SCALAR method =head1 VERSION Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 06 Aug 2000 Version: 1 Status: developing Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RFC 50 (v1) BiDirectional Support in PERL

This and other RFCs are available on the web at http://dev.perl.org/rfc/ =head1 TITLE BiDirectional Support in PERL =head1 VERSION Maintainer: Roman M. Parparov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 06 Aug 2000 Version: 1 Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Number: 50 =head1 ABSTRACT This paper

Re: RFC 24 (v1) Semi-finite (lazy) lists

Ariel Scolnicov wrote: > <...infinite lists...> > This (and your preceeding messages on the subject) is unfortunately > not possible to do in a clean manner; for that matter, neither is the > (..0) proposal. The I in which results are produced depends on > the order in which you generate the elem

<    1   2