Russ Allbery wrote:
> Glenn Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In my opinion, which you probably will also not agree with, attempting
> > to toggle between the current undef semantics and tristate semantics is
> > like trying to stuff three values into one bit.
>
> I do understand the ar
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 05:21:27 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
>=item perl6storm #0052
>
>Make "0" (more?) true so that people don't get surprised.
>
>or
>
>Make "0.00" (more?) false so that people don't get surprised.
Yup. This tripped me up, years ago, followed by a heated discussion on
comp.
> > =item perl6storm #0064
> >
> > Do something about microsoft's CRLF abomination.
>
> I think for the case of Microsoft C++ used for the Win32 port, everyone
> would be happy if Perl's sysopen, sysread, etc. did not require binmode.
> Unfortunately, Microsoft made the decision very early on in i
On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Glenn Linderman wrote:
> In my opinion, which you probably will also not agree with, attempting to
> toggle between the current undef semantics and tristate semantics is like
> trying to stuff three values into one bit. This comment assumes that the
> current undef is impleme
> while () {
> s/^M$//;
> # Process $_
> }
Cute psuedocode.
I don't like at all, it makes me feel like I'm dealing with a
typewritter. But, giving multiple values to $/ seems more painful to me
that to just
tr/\r//d;
on any suspected M$ strings
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 05:21:27 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
>=item perl6storm #0031
>
>Add pragma to auto-flock LOCK_EX any files opened O_WRONLY,
>and LOCK_SH otherwise.
Good idea. I thought of proposing something like this ages ago. Perl is
a high-level language, it must be thinkable to patch
Glenn Linderman said [in response to Russ]:
>
> ...maybe explaining the types of confusion that you see
> with a separate null and undef vs the types of confusion that you see with a
> tristate pragma would help me to grasp that logic.
I don't see why we need to keep spinning our wheels on this
On Fri, 22 Sep 2000, Greg Boug wrote:
> > > =item perl6storm #0064
> > >
> > > Do something about microsoft's CRLF abomination.
>
> Perhaps somehow allowing $/ to take multiple input delimeters (perhaps in a
> fashion similar to egrep)... How about:
[snip]
> $/ = "seperator1|seperator2"
Hugo wrote:
>
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "David L. Nicol" writes:
> :I think I did -- I guess v2 didn't make it in; I sent it again; what
> :were your and mjd's comments again?
>
> Here are the messages:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/perl6-language-regex%40perl.org/msg00306.html
> http://www.mail
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Perl should support an interactive mode.
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Ariel Scolnicov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 31 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 22 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 184
Matthew Cline wrote:
> But if Perl6 is changed so that you can write extensions in plain old C
> (without using something like Inline), it seems certain that there'd be some
> XS compatability tool, so as to not break all the current XS code out there.
> So then we could have three ways of writin
11 matches
Mail list logo
