Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> uninit looks like a typo for "unit".
>
> Maybe we need "denit" for "de-nitialize" :)...
Yuck. I dislike "de-" anything. "un-" is far more
often the correct prefix. Anyway, the counterpart
of "init" should be, I think, "exit". But seriously,
the opposite of "ini
> "PS" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> for ($x,$y,$z) (@a1,@a2,4..12,@a4) { ... }
>>
>> Probably we'll have to say that the user must explicitly zip if that
>> is what is desired.
PS> Yes, please. I view the flattening of lists as a feature, not a bug, and
PS> it has made Pe
> "DC" == Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> my_while { pred() } { # don't gimme no Tcl flac.
>> ...
>> } # no semicolon needed here!
DC> Just added to the RFC :-)
How would the parser handle this? Some '}' would need ';' some don't.
--
Chaim Frenkel
Would returning the array of status be sufficient?
@foo = chmod 755, "bar", "baz", "quux";
# @foo == (0, 2, 0);
How to convert them to error messages would be a challenge.
Unless passing them through $! would do the trick.
Hmm, perl -wle '$!=3; print $!'
No such process
Yup, w
At 01:26 AM 9/10/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
>Would returning the array of status be sufficient?
>
> @foo = chmod 755, "bar", "baz", "quux";
> # @foo == (0, 2, 0);
>
>How to convert them to error messages would be a challenge.
>Unless passing them through $! would do the trick.
