Ed Mills wrote:
>
> I actually saw this in the newsgroups and thought it was a neat idea. What
> about
>
>println $textvar;
>
> instead of
>
>print "$textvar\n";
>
> Ever so much easier to read and write, prints the arg and appends \n.
This is probably what I disliked most about Pasc
Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Proposal to utilize C<*> as the prefix to magic subroutines
I freely accept that this is not anything approaching a reasoned
critique but:
Yecch!
Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> At 12:07 AM 8/8/00 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> >On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:56:40 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> >
> > >I meant that BEGIN, END, and INIT aren't declared as subs at present but
> > >named blocks. I was surprised to discover that they're put in th
Just a thought, but I think it woul be a good idea to include the
'java-esqe' practice of including packages via foo.barr.*
or in Perl's case Foo::Bar::* (assume that the module include syntax remains
the same)...
I can see that in the case of some module directories, where the modules are
fairly
On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 11:51:06PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> On 07 Aug 2000 17:27:55 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
>
> >He mentioned two different encodings. Logical and Visual. I'm not clear
> >which is which. One orders the characters so that the first char is
> >first. The other reorders the c
"Peter Bevan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just a thought, but I think it woul be a good idea to include the
> 'java-esqe' practice of including packages via foo.barr.*
> or in Perl's case Foo::Bar::* (assume that the module include syntax remains
> the same)...
>
> I can see that in the case o
On Fri, Aug 04, 2000 at 04:48:24PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> I think this should mean what it means in Icon, namely, that
> $x < $y evaluates to false if $x >= $y, and evaluates to
> "$y (but true)" if $x < $y. This allows the operators to be
> nested, i.e. $x < $y < $z would be ( $x < $y )
> ?pattern? # one-time match
Oi! Scott! No!
I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy. Of course, if it's
modularized as Dan suggests, which has no effect at language level, I
wouldn't be unhappy.
Mx.
--
See, the stars are shining bright
Everything's all right tonight
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 13:30:22 +1000 (EST), Damian Conway wrote:
> > As for the regexp issue, just to clarify there's only one ambiguous case
> > we need to work out that I can see:
> >
> >/.*^foo/; # ok
>
>But: /.*^foo/m; #ambiguous
Hold it. What does this mean? Is the whole rege
Martyn J. Pearce sent the following bits through the ether:
> I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy
May I suggest that Perl6 will be a different language? I've seen the
"I use it, don't change it" argument a couple of times now and it's
not a strong enough argument. The whole point is
Leon Brocard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Martyn J. Pearce sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy
>
> May I suggest that Perl6 will be a different language? I've seen the
> "I use it, don't change it" argument a couple of times now and
On Aug 7, 10:12am, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Is there any reason you couldn't use "die" instead?
This isn't an objection to the proposal, but one example of where I'm
relying on the value returned by require() for a reason other than
error reporting.
I'm building Perl sub-routines (from templat
> > > As for the regexp issue, just to clarify there's only one ambiguous
case
> > > we need to work out that I can see:
> > >
> > >/.*^foo/; # ok
> >
> >But: /.*^foo/m; #ambiguous
>
> Hold it. What does this mean? Is the whole regex gonna be turned into an
> anonymous sub, or what?
- Original Message -
From: "Piers Cawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Peter Bevan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 10:32 AM
Subject: Re: wildcard includes
> "Peter Bevan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > "Peter Bevan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > However, I do like
> On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 01:44:28AM -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > 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 reasona
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 07:20:41 +1000, iain truskett wrote:
>A call to people:
>
>Who here has actually used something other than a constant '1' in a
>package?
>
>If so, why? (Possibly cite the code.)
I have. Just for fun.
42; # the ultimate answer...
# see "Hitchhiker's
On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 15:19:00 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>>Check the docs again. [snip]
>> Four special subroutines act as package constructors and
>> destructors. These are the `BEGIN', `CHECK', `INIT', and `END'
>> routines. The `sub' is optional for these routines.
>
>Drat. I propos
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:03:16 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
>If you mean that you MUST use "sub", I object. If you mean that the
>"sub" may not be used, I agree.
Addendum. I would propose that
BEGIN {
...
}
would be what it is now, and that
sub BEGIN {
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000, Leon Brocard wrote:
> Martyn J. Pearce sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy
>
> May I suggest that Perl6 will be a different language? I've seen the
> "I use it, don't change it" argument a couple of times now and i
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:42:40AM +, Nate Mueller wrote:
> Along the same line it would be useful to be able to overload the "truth
> operator" (bad word, I'm sorry). It's great to be able to do:
>
> if ($var1 && $var2)...
>
> But if you also want to do:
>
> if ($var1)..
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 10:02:35AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> "Peter Bevan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Just a thought, but I think it woul be a good idea to include the
> > 'java-esqe' practice of including packages via foo.barr.*
Hey, I'm famous :)
> However, I do like the idea of syn
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000, Roman M . Parparov wrote:
> It's not only the browser in the end.
> It'd expand the capabilities to any output device presumed LTR.
>
> > It sounds like a hack. Should Perl support such hacks in the core?
> >
> > Is this sofisticated enough, or do we need something more low-
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 07:11:33AM -0400, Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Aug 2000, Roman M . Parparov wrote:
>
> To explain for those who haven't handled a RTL language, numbers look
> the same as in LTR for most RTL languages, and I believe numerical
> prefixes also appear the same.
>
Yes
Short of writing a perlscript to do it, searching @INC for modules can be a
pain. How's about a switch that searches @INC for modules matching a regex
instead of executing anything (behaves like perl -v), so for example:
perl -M 'spook'
might return
/usr/local/lib/perl5:
-rw-r--r-- 1
Thus it was written in the epistle of Leon Brocard,
> Martyn J. Pearce sent the following bits through the ether:
>
> > I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy
>
> May I suggest that Perl6 will be a different language?
Actually, I think the point is that Perl6 won't be a different lang
Damian Conway wrote:
> So require and do issue a warning if they require or do an empty file.
> Better that than meaningless 1;'s at the end of every module.
If we're going to be changing these things, can't we at least ensure that
use Foo 'bar';
returns the result of the
Foo->im
> I guess that's not yet clear to me. After all, as I had pointed out to me,
>
> while()
>
> means
>
> while (defined($_ = ))
>
> not
>
> while ($_ = )
>
> even if the chomp() is handed an empty line, it will return a defined value.
> Only at the point at which returns undef will the whi
Thus it was written in the epistle of Segher Boessenkool,
>
> The magic defined($_ = ) only happens if is the only thing
> inside while().
>
> In this case, it's not (there's a chomp() inside as well), so the magic
> doesn't apply.
Ok. One more time . . .
I'm proposing that we change that.
iain truskett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:
: Who here has actually used something other than a constant '1' in a
: package?
I have.
: If so, why? (Possibly cite the code.)
Because it's more aesthetic (and useful) for me to see:
open '/afs/bp.ncsu.edu/path/to/no_such_file': No such file or
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:28:17AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > At 12:07 AM 8/8/00 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> > >On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:56:40 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> > >
> > > >I meant that BEGIN, END, and INIT aren't declared as subs at present
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:27:24AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> > Proposal to utilize C<*> as the prefix to magic subroutines
>
> I freely accept that this is not anything approaching a reasoned
> critique but:
>
> Yecch!
That comment is as good as any :-)
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAI
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > But what happens if you want multiple BEGIN blocks?
>
> The same thing that happens now. As I understand it, perl compiles
> and executes the BEGIN block then detroys it so that you may have as
> many BEGIN blocks as you want and each time perl thinks it's the firs
I started writing this mail by asking:
>Does anyone else agree that perl should have support for (but not
forcefully) error handling...
>maybe a little like Java's??
>I know that sort of thing can be acheived with eval(), but surely
Which is as far as I got, because something new has oc
> In a scalar context, it could produce a date object always:
>
>$date = date;
>
> However, when you went to do anything with it in a string context, it
> would call the appropriate method:
>
>print "$date"; # calls $date->STRING, which in this case would
> # prin
From: Peter Bevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Error handling should be supported by it's own keyword i.e.:
>
>trap {
> #CODE
>}
>release (error) {
> # ERROR
>}
I think this is touched on by RFC# 3 wherein I ask for user definable error
messages. With those one could presumably set an erro
As long as were culling, might want to consider removing chomp() and
possibly chop(). The language provides other ways to accomplish those thru a
simple regex, and if the "println" suggestion I made was "too specific" then
certainly chomp() is as well.
Just a thought to chomp on..
E
___
> might want to consider removing chomp() and possibly chop().
They're faster than regexes, right?
-Hao
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 03:46:45PM +, Ed Mills wrote:
> As long as were culling, might want to consider removing chomp() and
> possibly chop(). The language provides other ways to accomplish those thru a
> simple regex, and if the "println" suggestion I made was "too specific" then
> certa
From: Simply Hao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> might want to consider removing chomp() and possibly chop().
>
>They're faster than regexes, right?
Dunno about faster but so sweet.
I like
while (<>) { print chomp }
better then
while (<>{
s/$/$//;
p
At 09:28 AM 8/8/00 +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
>Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > At 12:07 AM 8/8/00 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
> > >On Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:56:40 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> > >
> > > >I meant that BEGIN, END, and INIT aren't declared as subs at present but
> > > >named b
These aren't normal subroutines because of the way they stack. If I
had my druthers, I'd make "sub" *forbidden* on such things.
If you wanted to make that parsable, pretend that BEGIN and END are
the names of functions with prototype (&) which register callbacks.
Nat
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 11:12:40AM -0500, Brust, Corwin wrote:
> From: Simply Hao [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> >> might want to consider removing chomp() and possibly chop().
> >
> >They're faster than regexes, right?
>
>
> Dunno about faster but so sweet.
>
> I like
>
> while (
At 10:33 AM 8/8/00 -0500, Brust, Corwin wrote:
>From: Peter Bevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>
> >Error handling should be supported by it's own keyword i.e.:
> >
> >trap {
> > #CODE
> >}
> >release (error) {
> > # ERROR
> >}
>
This is being hashed out on per6-language-flow right now...
--
> I am intrigued by the idea of a "scalar" context, and
> a "string" context though.
A string context is a special type of scalar. This distinction already
exists in Perl:
$one = $two; # scalar (not string)
print "$one";# string (and scalar)
-Nate
> While I think Time::Object is a really great module, and following these
> discussions I'm thinking of adding a date() function to it
Aaah! Please don't. :-) Name it something else, por favor (or at least
wait until this is finalized and make the interface the same).
> date arithmetic...not so
On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:29:47 GMT, Ed Mills wrote:
>I actually saw this in the newsgroups and thought it was a neat idea. What
>about
>
> println $textvar;
>
>instead of
>
> print "$textvar\n";
I can currently do that with $\, and $, for strings between items. For
example:
($\, $,)
On Sat, Aug 05, 2000 at 12:30:02AM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Someone wrote:
> > > How about "Deprecate use of file globbing with angle brackets. Emit a
> > > warning when this behaviour is used."
>
> I want to RFC this, but I feel like starting a new language with
> deprecated behaviours
> How usable is this ?
>
> I may be missing something, but if every variable mentioned in an anonymous
> block is assumed to be declared with my, then how do you access or modify
> the value of any variable outside the block ?
>
> Graham.
I knew someone was going to ask this; after I sent it I r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>As long as were culling, might want to consider removing chomp() and
>possibly chop(). The language provides other ways to accomplish those thru a
>simple regex, and if the "println" suggestion I made was "too specific" the
Graham Barr said:
> > Would result in "25" being printed out. Here's why:
> >
> >1. The C<$x = 10> is automatically scoped with its own C.
> >
> >2. The C<$x = 5> inside the B block is automatically
> > scoped with its own C.
> >
> >3. The C<$x = 25> code, however, inside the C s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>This is probably what I disliked most about Pascal - it presumes it
>knows best what units of output you want to write at any one time - a
>piece of a line or an entire line. I feel this dates back to the
>mainframe world (a
Ted Ashton writes:
: Thus it was written in the epistle of Segher Boessenkool,
: >
: > The magic defined($_ = ) only happens if is the only thing
: > inside while().
: >
: > In this case, it's not (there's a chomp() inside as well), so the magic
: > doesn't apply.
:
: Ok. One more time . . .
At 10:17 AM 8/8/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>These aren't normal subroutines because of the way they stack. If I
>had my druthers, I'd make "sub" *forbidden* on such things.
>
>If you wanted to make that parsable, pretend that BEGIN and END are
>the names of functions with prototype (&) wh
Larry Wall writes:
: (Note that under Unicode, we might well have one line terminated with a
: line separator, and the next line terminated with a page separator, and
Make that paragraph separator.
Larry
At 03:52 PM 8/7/00 -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
>Yes, obviously it has been used by many. That means that the equivalent
>functionality needs to be provided somehow in the complete standard perl6
>distribution. It doesn't mean localtime() has to be a keyword with its
>very own opcode that is par
> Second, as it seems common for someone learning perl to expect
>
> $without_newline = chomp($previous_form);
This proposal seeks to make things more consistent, which is good, but
at the expense of being less usable, which is bad. For example, these:
chomp;
chomp(@file);
chomp($val
Quoting RFC 23:
> That is, the expression:
>
> $check = __ < 2 + __ * atan($pi/__) or die __;
>
> is equivalent to:
>
> $check = sub (;) {
> $_[0] < 2 + $_[1] * atan($pi/$_[3]) or die $_[4]
> };
It strikes me that this is very fragile and limited (unless
Hello all. I'm not certian if there's a sublist that this is more approprate for, if
so, could someone tell me what it is? I can't see that this clearly applies to any of
them. Please cc me; I'm not yet subscribed to these lists (just tried again; if this
doesn't work, the listmasters will b
In RFC 23, Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> proposes a syntax for
"higher-order functions". One example given is related to a proposed
switch statement (RFC 22). A trimmed version is:
> sub beverage {
> switch (shift) {
> case sub{ $_[0] < 10 } { retu
please move this thread to flow as we have the error RFC posted there.
thanx,
uri
--
Uri Guttman - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.sysarch.com
SYStems ARCHitecture, Software Engineering, Perl, Internet, UNIX Consulting
The Perl Books Page --- http://www.sysarch.c
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:27:48PM -0400, Andy Dougherty wrote:
> It strikes me that this is very fragile and limited (unless I
> misunderstand, which is quite possible). For one thing, it appears to
> only be useful if your subroutine uses each argument exactly once. If
> you need to use any of
> "BL" == Bart Lateur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
BL> On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 01:29:47 GMT, Ed Mills wrote:
>> I actually saw this in the newsgroups and thought it was a neat idea. What
>> about
>>
>> println $textvar;
i am against println. it is not so useful that i would be using i
At 01:46 PM 8/8/00 -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>interesting point: we are all in agreement for filehandle specific $/
>and $\. but what about global default values for those handles which hve
>not had theirs set? you can still set the global $/ and affect all
>handles which don't have private $/.
>
Thus it was written in the epistle of Uri Guttman,
>
> interesting point: we are all in agreement for filehandle specific $/
> and $\. but what about global default values for those handles which hve
> not had theirs set? you can still set the global $/ and affect all
> handles which don't have p
At 10:12 AM 8/8/00 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Ted Ashton writes:
>: Thus it was written in the epistle of Segher Boessenkool,
>: >
>: > The magic defined($_ = ) only happens if is the only thing
>: > inside while().
>: >
>: > In this case, it's not (there's a chomp() inside as well), so the magic
Thus it was written in the epistle of Jonathan Scott Duff,
>
> Someone proposed (I think I deleted that email) to make
>
> while () { ... }
>
> work like
>
> while () { chomp; ... }
I'm not sure if I'm the someone you meant, but if so, the proposal was to make
while (c
> "LW" == Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
LW> Before we get too carried away discussing the syntax of chomp,
LW> let's look a bit at the semantics. What's chomp supposed to work
LW> on if we make $/ go away? I think any discussion of chomp without
LW> considering how the inpu
2000-08-08-04:42:00 Leon Brocard:
> Martyn J. Pearce sent the following bits through the ether:
> > I use this in one-liners, and it's _dead_ handy
>
> May I suggest that Perl6 will be a different language?
If perl6 substantially fails to fill the important roles that perl5
fills, we should stop
At 02:18 PM 8/8/00 +, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>This and other RFCs are available on the web at
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
>
>=head1 TITLE
>
>Objects should have builtin stringifying STRING method
>
>=head1 VERSION
>
>Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: 06 Aug 2000
Thus it was written in the epistle of Nathan Wiger,
> > Second, as it seems common for someone learning perl to expect
> >
> > $without_newline = chomp($previous_form);
>
> This proposal seeks to make things more consistent, which is good, but
> at the expense of being less usable, which is ba
Dan Sugalski writes:
> Is this an update to the original RFC 48 with a new title? Or is it a new
> RFC mis-numbered?
Actually, it's an update to 49 with a slightly different title, so the
answer to both of your questions is "yes". The 48/49 confusion has
been cleared up in the archive.
Nat
Bennett Todd wrote:
>
> There are many intents and points to this project. As _I_ see them,
> they include, in no particular order:
>
> - cleaning up the language definition, where practical without
> losing the distinctive appeal of perl to happy perl programmers;
>
> - cleaning up the imple
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:53:21PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
> I'm not sure if I'm the someone you meant, but if so, the proposal was to make
>
> while (chomp()) { ... }
>
> work like
>
> while () { chomp; ... }
Oh. I think I'd prefer to see chomp() go away and be replaced by
s
Thus it was written in the epistle of Larry Wall,
> Before we get too carried away discussing the syntax of chomp, let's
> look a bit at the semantics. What's chomp supposed to work on if we
> make $/ go away?
Right. But that's not yet decided :-).
> I think any discussion of
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:56:12PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> a couple of ideas. one, i proposed we keep a global $/ and $\ for
> default use by handles which haven't set their own.
Rather than having global $/ and $\, each filehandle has their's
defaulted to something reasonable.
> two, instea
Thus it was written in the epistle of Jonathan Scott Duff,
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:56:12PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > a couple of ideas. one, i proposed we keep a global $/ and $\ for
> > default use by handles which haven't set their own.
>
> Rather than having global $/ and $\, each fil
I don't like it.
There is currently nothing preventing author B from adding something
to the Foo::Bar hierarchy and infecting the other modules.
This would require two authors that currently do not have to
coordinate with each other to be careful.
Another problem is that an external change woul
Dan Sugalski said:
> Which brings up the questions:
>
> * What about scalars that didn't come from filehandles?
> * Should the chomp function use the filehandle's current separator, or the
> one in effect when it was read?
> * Do we even want to allow after-the-fact chomps, or do it automagically
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 02:16:57PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
> I, for one, would like to know where the assumption came from that there would
> be no default filehandle.
I believe Larry said he was probably going to axe it.
> Is it necessary that instead of typing
>
> print 'Hello World.';
Bennett Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The poster you are replying to said "I use this in one-liners, and it's
> _dead_ handy."; that conjures up the idioms like
> perl -nle 'print if 1.. ?^$?' [filename]
> which barfs out only the header; replace "if" with "unless" and it
> chops the
> "TA" == Ted Ashton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> Thus it was written in the epistle of Jonathan Scott Duff,
>> On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:56:12PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote: > a
>> couple of ideas. one, i proposed we keep a global $/ and $\ for >
>> default use by handles which have
From: Ted Ashton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>> I don't particularly mind the last two - in fact they add some benefits
>> (like not modifying the original), which are nice to have. However, that
>> first one, frankly, drives me nuts.
>
>Please reread the proposal. chomp() called in void context
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:46:41PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> interesting point: we are all in agreement for filehandle specific $/
> and $\. but what about global default values for those handles which hve
> not had theirs set? you can still set the global $/ and affect all
> handles which don't
At 02:29 PM 8/8/00 -0400, Michael Mathews wrote:
>Dan Sugalski said:
> > Which brings up the questions:
> >
> > * What about scalars that didn't come from filehandles?
> > * Should the chomp function use the filehandle's current separator, or the
> > one in effect when it was read?
> > * Do we eve
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:50:35PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
> Hear, hear! Chomp (which I still consider a useful critter :-), needs a
> $/ sort of thing to know what to chomp and the lines it chomps may or may
> not have come from a given file.
Chomping *is* useful, but it's a per-filehandle t
> "JSD" == Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JSD> On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 01:46:41PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>> interesting point: we are all in agreement for filehandle specific
>> $/ and $\. but what about global default values for those handles
>> which hve not had
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 02:44:59PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> the key word besides global is default. this would be the value used by
> any new filehandle created. you can override that at anytime in that
> filehandle. otherwise the default value for $/ for new handles will be
> hardcoded in %CON
On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:46:04AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> The RFC doesn't mention localtime() for just this reason. The idea would
> be localtime would be GONE in Perl 6, instead moved to Time::Local.
> date() would replace it.
Why is this a good idea? Perl programs have been using localti
Thus it was written in the epistle of Brust, Corwin,
>
> From: Ted Ashton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >> I don't particularly mind the last two - in fact they add some benefits
> >> (like not modifying the original), which are nice to have. However, that
> >> first one, frankly, drives me nuts.
Dan Sugalski said:
> > > * Do we even want to allow after-the-fact chomps, or do it
automagically
> >at read time?
> "Yes" is rather ambiguous.
To clarify: "Yes", we (I) want to allow after-the-fact chomps. As you
alluded to yourself there are times when you may want to chomp strings that
were no
I'm working on an RFC on module versioning. It'd be done by now, except
my boss and family keep expecting me to work and be fatherly. :-) Let
me get that banged out, and then lets look at adding wildcards to it.
Nathan Torkington wrote:
> These aren't normal subroutines because of the way they stack. If I
> had my druthers, I'd make "sub" *forbidden* on such things.
I like that idea. But then, they also shouldn't go into the symbol table.
At least, not as CODE.
> If you wanted to make that parsable,
> "MM" == Michael Mathews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >What about a > chomp($foo, '\r\n'); > # or > chomp(, '\r\n');
>> >syntax.
>>
>> Looks an awful lot like: s/\r\n//; to me...
MM> Yep. It should-- that's all chomp does afterall. The difference is
MM> that the proposed chom
John Porter writes:
> > If you wanted to make that parsable, pretend that BEGIN and END are
> > the names of functions with prototype (&) which register callbacks.
>
> I agree ... except that, in perl5 at least, you'd need a terminating
> semicolon if that analogy were 100% accurate.
I realized
Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > How usable is this ?
> >
> > I may be missing something, but if every variable mentioned in an anonymous
> > block is assumed to be declared with my, then how do you access or modify
> > the value of any variable outside the block ?
> >
> > Graham.
>
Thus it was written in the epistle of Uri Guttman,
>
> if a ref to a scalar, it chomps in place. return the ref? the chomped
> char count?
. . . the point of the RFC was to propose making chomp()'s behaviour change
depending on context.
Here's the summary so far as I can tell:
One-argument cho
> If there's a warning if a require'd or use'd file is empty, that's more
> than good enough for me.
Already added to V2 of the RFC.
Damian
> Most of the requests for deletion seem to begin with, "This isn't
> used..."
>
> To which, "*I* use it." is a very valid argument.
Agreed. The real problem with ?...? is that it complicates the hell out
of the parser. So long as the special magic is retained for m?...?, I
would su
> "TA" == Ted Ashton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
TA> One-argument chomp():
TA> array:
TA> chomp()s each element of array using $/?
TA> two-argument chomp():
TA> does as above, but using the second argument (which is a scalar, not a
TA>regex)
how do you te
Thus it was written in the epistle of Uri Guttman,
>
> how do you tell the above two apart? by array do you mean only an array
> variable? then you can't chomp a list of scalar values or multiple
> arrays, etc.
>
> this needs to be clarified.
Quite true. The two-argument one is new to me and I
1 - 100 of 195 matches
Mail list logo
