> Now, if this is what you want, add a :readonly attribute:
So the proposal is: make the dangerous one the default.
I don't think that's a good idea.
Damian
Why? What is the gain? Perl only runs on the local machine.
As long as one can increment and take the difference what difference
does the epoch make?
What is of more interest would be knownig the valid range of time
supported on each platform. Even if you standardize the epoch, the
platform may
Peter Scott wrote:
> I have often wished that digraphs were not bundled with variables in this
> respect, i.e., I wanted to put a string containing \n inside single quotes
> just 'cuz it didn't contain variables to be interpolated. Whether there's
> a way of improving this behavior or not I don'
Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> > All variables should be C<$x>. They should behave appropriately
> > according to their object types and methods.
>
> No thanks. I frequently use variables $foo, @foo, and %foo at the same
> time when they contain the same information in different formats. For
> exampl
Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would very much hate to see the prefixes go away or merge into a
> single one, but I'm not so sure I agree with Russ. I've had to teach
> lots of beginners that even though $x refers to scalar x, $x{...} refers
> to %x, but don't think of it that way bec
At 12:57 PM 8/15/00 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>This is a succinct summary of the basic conclusions thus far:
>
>1. a default filehandle IS needed sometimes, but only
> for stuff like print
>
>2. $|, $\, $/, etc will probably go away entirely in
> favor of object methods such a
Jeremy Howard writes:
> @result = @a || @b;
>
> Which applies '||' component-wise to elements of @a and @b, placing the
> result in @result.
*Ptui* That's not how *I* want || to behave on lists/arrays.
I want
@result = @a || @b;
to be like:
(@result = @a) or (@result = @b);
That's what
(-internals removed from the CC list)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> All calendar systems are arbitrary.
Yup. So let's use Larry's birthdate-and-time as the epoch marker.
Seriously, stick with 1970 (if we need an arbitrary marker, no reason
it can't be a familiar one) and extend date/time values
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, John Porter wrote:
> Yes. OTOH, if it doesn't add *enough* information, it's not cost-
> effective. Most of proposals, such as highlander types and this 109,
> reduce the amount of info carried by the symbol to the point that it
> isn't worth having. Furthermore, if the OO
Perl6 RFC Librarian writes:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Less line noise - let's get rid of @%
I have some problems with this RFC:
* you misunderstand the purpose of $ and @, which is to indicate
singular vs plural. You say a $ indicates a string or number,
but really it indicates a single thing.
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Less line noise - let's get rid of @%
I understand that with the pervasiveness of object-orientation we
are now more than ever seeing objects that behave like arrays and
hashes and that it seems strange to see these listlike or hashlike
objects represented as scalars. Howev
> "PS" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I want this to *always* print out the _value_ of @stuff, even if it's
>> unititalized.
PS> Arrays aren't uninitialized. They contain zero or more scalars, some of
PS> which may be uninitialized.
I don't know if it is still true. But at
John Porter writes:
> Heh, that's not OO-like syntax! That's a switch statement! :-(
>
> Maybe this is "OO":
>
> attempt = new Try { cough "outa here"; };
> attempt.catch( matawba => { sustain } );
> attempt.catch( ebola => { overrule } );
> attempt.catch( { punt } );
>
John Porter writes:
> I think as long as equivalent (and better!) functionality is available,
> through equivalently terse syntax, who's to care? Why is
>
> $h{'foo'} = 'bar';
>
> instrinsically preferable to
>
> assoc( %h, 'foo', 'bar' );
I'm horrified you have to ask this quest
Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Jeremy Howard writes:
> > @result = @a || @b;
> >
> > Which applies '||' component-wise to elements of @a and @b, placing the
> > result in @result.
>
> *Ptui* That's not how *I* want || to behave on lists/arrays.
>
> I want
> @result = @a || @b;
> to be like:
>
Damian Conway wrote:
>
>> Now, if this is what you want, add a :readonly attribute:
>
> So the proposal is: make the dangerous one the default.
> I don't think that's a good idea.
You're going to have to explain to me how these differ in their
dangerousness:
$r->func = $x; # this mo
At 05:47 PM 8/15/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
>Jeremy Howard writes:
> > @result = @a || @b;
> >
> > Which applies '||' component-wise to elements of @a and @b, placing the
> > result in @result.
>
>*Ptui* That's not how *I* want || to behave on lists/arrays.
>
>I want
> @result = @a |
Peter Scott wrote:
> I have often wished that digraphs were not bundled with variables in this
> respect, i.e., I wanted to put a string containing \n inside single quotes
> just 'cuz it didn't contain variables to be interpolated. Whether there's
> a way of improving this behavior or not I don't
> Why? What is the gain? Perl only runs on the local machine.
>
> As long as one can increment and take the difference what difference
> does the epoch make?
>
> What is of more interest would be knownig the valid range of time
> supported on each platform. Even if you standardize the epoch, the
Chaim Frenkel writes:
> Why? What is the gain? Perl only runs on the local machine.
Epoch seconds are a convenient representation for dates and times.
Varying epochs make it an unreliable representation when data are
shared. A consistent epoch would fix this.
Nat
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Buddha Buck wrote:
> Leap-seconds are a PITA for generic time routines.
>
Not really. They don't happen very often so you simply have a subroutine
that has them all (this is how SLALIB does it). The pain is that you have
to release a new version of perl each time a new leap
Nathan Wiger writes:
> > So the proposal is: make the dangerous one the default.
> > I don't think that's a good idea.
>
> You're going to have to explain to me how these differ in their
> dangerousness:
Nathan, you misunderstand Damian. What's dangerous is making every
subroutine lvaluable. H
Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Leap-seconds are a PITA for generic time routines.
Unix time ignores leap seconds. POSIX basically says "don't worry about
them" and by and large that works. It means your system clock drifts a
little over time and then gets corrected back by xntpd or
> Damian Conway wrote:
> >
> >> Now, if this is what you want, add a :readonly attribute:
> >
> > So the proposal is: make the dangerous one the default.
> > I don't think that's a good idea.
>
> You're going to have to explain to me how these differ in their
> dangerousness:
>
>$r->fu
Thus it was written in the epistle of Russ Allbery,
>
> This falls firmly in the category of things that are powerful for
> experienced users of the language but may be somewhat difficult to learn.
> I don't think Perl has being easy to learn as it's primary goal, nor
> should it.
Russ,
Would
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 05:47:53PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> I want
> @result = @a || @b;
> to be like:
> (@result = @a) or (@result = @b);
>
> That's what all my students keep expecting it to mean.
And that's what I keep wishing it meant too.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL
Thus it was written in the epistle of Nathan Torkington,
> Chaim Frenkel writes:
> > Why? What is the gain? Perl only runs on the local machine.
>
> Epoch seconds are a convenient representation for dates and times.
> Varying epochs make it an unreliable representation when data are
> shared. A
Mark Cogan wrote:
> At 05:47 PM 8/15/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> >Jeremy Howard writes:
> > > @result = @a || @b;
> > >
> > > Which applies '||' component-wise to elements of @a and @b, placing
the
> > > result in @result.
> >
> >*Ptui* That's not how *I* want || to behave on lists/arr
At 12:39 PM 8/16/00 +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
>Mark Cogan wrote:
> > At 05:47 PM 8/15/00 -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> > >Jeremy Howard writes:
> > > > @result = @a || @b;
> > > >
> > > > Which applies '||' component-wise to elements of @a and @b, placing
>the
> > > > result in @result.
>
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 07:12:08AM -0700, Syloke Soong wrote:
>Yes it should be
>use strict qw(..);
>
>It would be wonderful if someone could invest in an RFC or two to propose the use of
>strict.
>I didn't intend to propose the use of such terms. I simply needed to put a handle on
>some th
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 08:03:44PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>=head1 TITLE
>
>Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch
>
>=head1 VERSION
>
> Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 14 Aug 2000
> Last-Modified: 15 Aug 2000
> Version: 2
> Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please take this discussion to the new -errors sublist. Thanks in
advance!
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948 Mobile:
You are missing the beauty of vector/matrix operations. The math folks
really would like to be able to describe the operation wanted and have
perl do the optimization.
Would adding another character be helpful
@result = @a x|| @b?
@result = @a ||| @b?
or perhaps a modifier?
> "NT" == Nathan Torkington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
NT> Chaim Frenkel writes:
>> Why? What is the gain? Perl only runs on the local machine.
NT> Epoch seconds are a convenient representation for dates and times.
NT> Varying epochs make it an unreliable representation when data are
NT> sh
> "BB" == Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Why? What is the gain? Perl only runs on the local machine.
>>
>> As long as one can increment and take the difference what difference
>> does the epoch make?
>>
>> What is of more interest would be knownig the valid range of time
>> supp
> "RA" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RA> Buddha Buck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Leap-seconds are a PITA for generic time routines.
RA> Unix time ignores leap seconds. POSIX basically says "don't worry about
RA> them" and by and large that works. It means your system clock
At 11:11 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
>You are missing the beauty of vector/matrix operations.
No, I'm not; I'm opining that the vast majority of Perl users don't need to
do vector/matrix ops, and that they don't belong in the core.
>The math folks
>really would like to be able to de
On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:54:28AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
>> As I understand things:
>>
>> BLOCK1 andthen BLOCK2
>>
>> evaluates BLOCK1 and then if BLOCK1 evaluates to "true" evaluates
>> BLOCK2. If BLOCK2 evaluates to "true" we're done. If BLOCK2
>> evaluates
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 10:38:23PM -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
> Well then, why 1970? If we're defining our own, why buy into one which is
> scheduled to blow up in 2038? Why not at the very least start with Jan 1, 2K?
Um, it's not guaranteed to blow up in 2038. That's an implementation
detail.
I assume you meant that :lvalue() takes a parameter list. Either a
singleton named variable $, @, or %.
Or If it makes sense even a more complex parameter list could be
demanded.
sub foo :lvalue(Dog $fido, int @array, %hash) {}
foo() = ($name, 0..10, %bar);
> "BB" == Buddha Buck <[EMAI
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 06:53:30PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> What if you want to print to a default file handle and also to STDOUT?
>
> select(OTHERFH);
> print "This goest to OTHERFH\n";
> print STDOOUT "This went to STDOUT\n";
print $_ "Here I come to save the day!\n" for
At 05:55 PM 8/15/00 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > > No, neither proposal makes sense. Arrays can be stored compactly and
> > >
> > > $a[1_000_000_000] = 'oh, really?' # :-)
> > >
> > my int @a: sparse;
>
>I see: you have a time machine and I don't. So very unfair...
Need to upgrade to
At 10:28 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Ted Ashton wrote:
>I don't know for sure what Perl's main goal is, but it's definitely
>significant to Perl to make life easier and it has done that.
It seems to be the language to Fix Things That Annoy Us. :) Or so it's
always seemed to me. (And it seems to be the dr
> "MC" == Mark Cogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
MC> What should:
MC> @a = defined @a;
MC> return?
Counter example:@a = \($a, $b, $c);
(Not really a full fledged counter example since it is a liter list.)
>> Treating || as a special case is asking for trouble. If you want a flow
>>
Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whispered:
| > > Doesn't it make more sense to get rid of arrays and just use hashes?
| >
| >I guess it depends on what you think makes sense; but it seems to me
| >that an array is a more fundamental data type; that it's easi
Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whispered:
| At 04:03 PM 8/15/00 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
| > > open, you fall through, someimes through several floors, until somewhere
| > > you encounter a safety net: you were caught. You can continue from
| > > the
At 11:43 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > "MC" == Mark Cogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>MC> What should:
>MC> @a = defined @a;
>MC> return?
>
>Counter example:@a = \($a, $b, $c);
I guess I'm missing the point; how is this different from
@a = [$a,$b,$c];
which works to
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 11:17:16PM -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> Sorry, I don't buy that. Not every program will be perl. Plus you are
> assuming that epoch seconds are good everywhere. And even if it were
> why should any other program use the same epoch.
Well, we're not talking about *every* pr
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 08:59:25PM -0700, Mark Cogan wrote:
> At 11:43 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >Counter example:@a = \($a, $b, $c);
>
> I guess I'm missing the point; how is this different from
>
> @a = [$a,$b,$c];
Well, I've lost the point of this thread, but
Lightning flashed, thunder crashed and "Jeremy Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> whispered:
| @unzipped_list2 should not be([X,Y,Z], [A,B,C], [M]). The RFC's proposed
| behaviour makes it work as the inverse of zip(), which is the desired
| behaviour.
The reason I used letters instead of the actual val
At 11:05 PM 8/15/00 -0500, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 08:59:25PM -0700, Mark Cogan wrote:
> > At 11:43 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> > >Counter example:@a = \($a, $b, $c);
> >
> > I guess I'm missing the point; how is this different from
> >
> > @a = [$a
NOTICE: reply-to set to the -language-datetime list.
Ted Ashton writes:
> Well then, why 1970? If we're defining our own, why buy into one
> which is scheduled to blow up in 2038? Why not at the very least
> start with Jan 1, 2K?
This works, provided epoch seconds are stored in some form of bi
(Reply-to set to -datetime list)
Chaim Frenkel writes:
> NT> Epoch seconds are a convenient representation for dates and times.
> NT> Varying epochs make it an unreliable representation when data are
> NT> shared. A consistent epoch would fix this.
>
> Sorry, I don't buy that. Not every program
Chaim Frenkel said:
> BB> Unfortunately, the valid range of time supported is easily determined,
> BB> and disturbingly short:
>
> BB> Into the future: to next December 31st or June 30th, whichever is
> BB> closer.
> BB> Into the past : to past January 1st or July 1st, whichever is
> BB>
Stephen P. Potter writes:
> Why is it silly? Hashes and arrays are *conceptually* very similar
> (even if they are extremely different implementation-wise).
If that were the case, I think students would have an easier time
grasping hashes. It seems very common (yes yes, you all got them
immedia
Jeremy Howard writes:
> Note that RFC 82 (http://tmtowtdi.perl.org/rfc/82.pod) proposes that _all_
> operators behave the same way in a list context. To me, this consistancy
> would be a real win.
I don't know. Perl has been all for breaking consistency when it made
the programmer's life easier,
Chaim Frenkel writes:
> You are missing the beauty of vector/matrix operations. The math folks
> really would like to be able to describe the operation wanted and have
> perl do the optimization.
Fine, but make it an option.
> Would adding another character be helpful
>
> @result = @a x||
Your RFC says:
> Currently, operators applied to lists in a list context behave
> counter-intuitively:
Counter-intuitively is different from consistently. Your title is
misleading. Perl's ops *are* applied consistently: they consistently
give their arguments scalar context (except for the short
> I assume you meant that :lvalue() takes a parameter list. Either a
> singleton named variable $, @, or %.
I'm proposing that an lvalue subroutine have access to the rvalue
assigned through a channel other than the standard argument list @_. I
used, as an example, an explicit named paramete
Jeremy Howard writes:
> It seems obvious that @a should be the whole array @a, not the size of the
> array. If I want to check the size of @a, I should have to do so explicitly,
> with scalar or $#.
It depends. Which interpretation depends on which action you'll want
most often.
> @result = @
Jonathan wrote:
>
>On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 09:45:55AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>> I don't know about this. Sounds cool, but I think we should stick to
>> something that somebody somewhere uses already. Of course, something
>> standard like 0 AD isn't bad.
>
>Standard for whom? I bet there are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I don't think this is a language issue. However, I don't believe
> there's a -doc working group yet, either.
>
> Is it time for a -doc group to form?
Not unless there's a significant interest in doc issues, as reflected
in RFCs.
Nat
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 05:55 PM 8/15/00 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > > > No, neither proposal makes sense. Arrays can be stored compactly
and
> > > >
> > > > $a[1_000_000_000] = 'oh, really?' # :-)
> > > >
> > > my int @a: sparse;
> >
> >I see: you have a time machine and I don't. So
"Stephen P. Potter" wrote:
>
> I think fail() and handle() are good. Something fail()ed and
> it was handle()d by an exception.
Fail is no good, because exceptions can be used to indicate success.
Just because you don't isn't a counter-argument. Exceptions are
*not* the same as errors, that's
Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Your [Jeremy's] RFC says:
> > Currently, operators applied to lists in a list context behave
> > counter-intuitively:
>
> Counter-intuitively is different from consistently. Your title is
> misleading. Perl's ops *are* applied consistently: they consistently
> give the
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 11:46:04PM -0400, Stephen P. Potter wrote:
> Why is it silly? Hashes and arrays are *conceptually* very similar (even
> if they are extremely different implementation-wise). One of them has
> implicit key, the other has an explicit key. They both provide some sort
> of o
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 10:26:13PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> I like the idea of adding the context-aware operators, but I don't
> think I'd use them as often as I use "the number of things in the
> array". I think most Perl programmers would be in the same camp.
> Unless you can show a co
Mark Cogan wrote:
> At 12:39 PM 8/16/00 +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
> >It seems obvious that @a should be the whole array @a, not the size of
the
> >array. If I want to check the size of @a, I should have to do so
explicitly,
> >with scalar or $#.
> >
> >This is non-obvious if you think that || is
At 04:02 PM 8/16/00 +1000, Jeremy Howard wrote:
>Nathan Torkington wrote:
> > Your [Jeremy's] RFC says:
> > > Currently, operators applied to lists in a list context behave
> > > counter-intuitively:
> >
> > Counter-intuitively is different from consistently. Your title is
> > misleading. Perl's
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 11:15:03PM -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> No, || is half-consistent at the moment: the left hand side is forced into
> scalar context but the result context propagates down the right hand
> side. I challenge anyone to come up with a rationalization for this that
> does not
Damien Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Arrays are ordered. Hashes are not. Sure, you can iterate over a hash,
> but add an element to one and you can change the order of everything in
> it.
Formally, I believe it's permissable for a hash implementation to return a
different order the second
Mark Cogan wrote:
> At 11:11 PM 8/15/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >You are missing the beauty of vector/matrix operations.
>
> No, I'm not; I'm opining that the vast majority of Perl users don't need
to
> do vector/matrix ops, and that they don't belong in the core.
>
The vast majority of Perl
Please take this discussion to perl6-language-datetime. Thanks!
K.
--
Kirrily Robert -- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://netizen.com.au/
Open Source development, consulting and solutions
Level 10, 500 Collins St, Melbourne VIC 3000
Phone: +61 3 9614 0949 Fax: +61 3 9614 0948 Mobile: +61 410 664
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 09:27:23PM -0700, Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote:
>LIST: perl6-language-objects
>CHAIR: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>MISSION:Develop RFCs related to objects and OO programming in
>Perl, possibly rationalising existing RFCs where they
Peter Scott wrote:
>
> Can someone knowledgeable on this issue speak to it?
>
> Will $| $/ $\ et al be retired, or be valid for some default filehandle?
>
> Will there still be default filehandles?
There's been a big debate on the -io list about this. No clear decisions
yet, but looks like the
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Backtracking
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: iVAN Georgiev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 104
=head1 ABSTRACT
Backtraking mechanism is core f
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
unlink() should be left alone
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 04 Aug 2000
Last-Modified: 14 Aug 2000
Version: 2
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 29
Sta
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Downgrade or remove "In string @ must be \@" error
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 105
Stat
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Standardize ALL Perl platforms on UNIX epoch
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Aug 2000
Last-Modified: 15 Aug 2000
Version: 2
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
N
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
lvalue subs should receive the rvalue as an argument
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 107
> "s" == skud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
s> Command line options aren't really a language issue, however I'm not
s> sure that there is a better list for them. Anyone on bootstrap got any
s> good ideas?
shove it over onto -internals.
They will have to implement it anyway.
The only other
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 08:44:48AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> There seems to be a groundswell against this idea, which is fine by me
> (heck, just because it's my idea doesn't me it's a GOOD one!).
>
> Here's a different proposal, same vein: "Standardize all Perl platforms
> on the UNIX epoch".
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: Yep. Or more generally "Standardize Perl on all platforms to one
: common time epoch" and reccommend the Unix epoch since it's so
: widespread. :-)
Oh, gee, where's your sense of history? (As in creating our own. :-)
Maybe we should invent our own epoch, like the ye
Larry Wall wrote:
>
> Oh, gee, where's your sense of history? (As in creating our own. :-)
> Maybe we should invent our own epoch, like the year 2000. Or use a
> really standard one, like the year 0 AD (aka 1 BC).
I don't know about this. Sounds cool, but I think we should stick to
something t
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 09:25:34AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> : Yep. Or more generally "Standardize Perl on all platforms to one
> : common time epoch" and reccommend the Unix epoch since it's so
> : widespread. :-)
>
> Oh, gee, where's your sense of history? (As in
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Scope of Polymorphic References and Objects
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Syloke Soong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 15 Aug 2000
Version: 1
Number: 108
=head1 A
Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
[snip reconstructionist history and newer-is-better fallacy]
> I argue in this Brave New World the distinction between C<$x>, C<@x> and
> C<%x> are no longer useful and should be abolished. We might want
> to use all kinds of array objects, why should @x be special? Ra
Jon Ericson wrote:
>
> Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> [snip reconstructionist history and newer-is-better fallacy]
>
> > I argue in this Brave New World the distinction between C<$x>, C<@x> and
> > C<%x> are no longer useful and should be abolished. We might want
> > to use all kinds of array o
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Less line noise - let's get rid of @%
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Karl Glazebrook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 15 August 2000
Version: 1
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 109
=head1 ABSTRACT
T
Subscribe by sending mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
More details at http://dev.perl.org/lists.shtml
LIST: perl6-language-objects
CHAIR: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MISSION:Develop RFCs related to objects and OO programming in
Perl, possibly rationalisi
On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 09:45:55AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> I don't know about this. Sounds cool, but I think we should stick to
> something that somebody somewhere uses already. Of course, something
> standard like 0 AD isn't bad.
Standard for whom? I bet there are *millions* of Jews for wh
Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>
> > Is Perl currently using different epochs on different platforms? If so, I
>
> Yes. MacOS and VMS. (Though VMS' localtime() uses the UNIX definition,
> just to be portable.) MacOS' epoch zero is 1900 (or was it 1901?),
> VMS' epoch zero is 17-NOV-1858 00:00:00.0
At 09:25 AM 8/15/00 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>: Yep. Or more generally "Standardize Perl on all platforms to one
>: common time epoch" and reccommend the Unix epoch since it's so
>: widespread. :-)
>
>Oh, gee, where's your sense of history? (As in creating our own. :-
At 10:56 PM 8/14/00 -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > Is Perl currently using different epochs on different platforms? If so, I
>
>Yes. MacOS and VMS. (Though VMS' localtime() uses the UNIX definition,
>just to be portable.) MacOS' epoch zero is 1900 (or was it 1901?),
>VMS' epoch zero is 17
> "RA" == Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RA> Is Perl currently using different epochs on different platforms? If so, I
RA> can definitely see the wisdom in doing something about *that* and
RA> off-loading the system-local time processing into modules (although I can
RA> also see th
Proposal for 64 bit time.
Just can't help but put in a little more A bit of speculative physics and
religion here.
To keep historians, geologists, cosmologists, theologians, ufologists and aliens
happy, Perl needs neutral time base, which has the most far fetched possibility.
Imagine a kid
At 02:23 PM 8/15/00 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Modified Julian Day 0 thus started on 17 Nov 1858 (Gregorian) at 00:00:00
>UTC.
>(somebody threw that date out, It appears to be purely
>arbitrary rather than based on some celestial event)
Not arbitrary at all. From: http://www.kgb.com/calend.
On Tue, 15 Aug 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> >
> > > Is Perl currently using different epochs on different platforms? If so, I
> >
> > Yes. MacOS and VMS. (Though VMS' localtime() uses the UNIX definition,
> > just to be portable.) MacOS' epoch zero is 1900 (or was i
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think I'd snag a date after the last western country went Julian, just to
> avoid some of the less fun time conversion issues. (How long ago Jan 1,
> 1690 was depends on what country you're in)
I think you mean
On Mon, Aug 14, 2000 at 08:40:32PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> No, but currently Perl IS forcing Windows, Mac, and BeOS users to
> understand what the UNIX epoch is.
So you're proposing that rather than give one platform (unix) an
advantage, we force all platforms to use some other completely
a
101 - 200 of 207 matches
Mail list logo
