On 24 Sep 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> Eliminate unquoted barewords from Perl entirely
Ugh, don't force me to select a One True Way, PLEASE. I don't think there
is really any unresolvable ambiguities the way it is in Perl5. Lets not
sacrifice the ability to do it the right way, just to pre
"David L. Nicol" wrote:
>
> > Perl currently only has C and C operators which work case-sensitively.
> > It would be a useful addition to add case-insensitive equivalents.
>
> As I recall, the consensus the last time this came up was that C and
> C would be perfect examples w/in a RFC proposing
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, iain truskett wrote:
> * Adam Turoff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [26 Sep 2000 17:15]:
> > On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 05:02:02PM +1100, iain truskett wrote:
> > > Is there much point having a lightweight CGI module? If you say 'I want
> > > it to load quickly', I say 'get mod_perl'.
Agr
On Mon, 25 Sep 2000, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 09:55:38AM +0100, Richard Proctor wrote:
> > While this may be a fun thing to do - why? what is the application?
>
> I think I said in the RFC, didn't I? It's extending the counting use of tr///
> to allow you to count several d
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 04:41:21AM -0400, Alan Gutierrez wrote:
> > > > > Robust input parsing: yes.
> > > >
> > > > > General purpose output formatting: no, [...]
> > > >
> > > > > Rudimentary HTTP header emission: probably.
>
> So this is the definition of first-class?
Have you read the RFC
From: Damian Conway [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
...
>
> No. That's my point. I want to match BANG followed by maximal whitespace
> followed by another BANG. But a line-by-line filter fails dismally if that
> maximal whitespace contains a newline.
>
> Admittedly this particular example is contrived
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 12:04:50AM -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 07:50:28AM +0100, Richard Proctor wrote:
> > On Mon 25 Sep, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> > > Turn on tainting
> >
> > What would it do on a platform that does not support Tainting?
>
> Is this a real issue? I
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 12:34:00AM -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
> Making '@permissions = -rwx $filename;' work is an interesting new
> suggestion.
Yep.
> Of course, I should say that I've been hanging out with some
> snake-hearders recently.
Hey, we could learn a thing or two from some snake her
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 05:53:13AM -, Nate Wiger wrote:
> Currently, file tests cannot be grouped, resulting in very long
> expressions when one wants to check to make sure some thing is a
> readable, writeable, executable directory:
>
>if ( -d $file && -r $file && -w $file && -x $file )
On 26 Sep 2000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Allow grouping of -X file tests and add C builtin
Nice summary. Thanks.
> =head1 IMPLEMENTATION
>
> This would involve making C<-[a-zA-Z]+> a special token in all contexts,
> serving as a shortcut for the C builtin.
>
> =head1
> "JSD" == Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I'll revise the RFC to add 'readable()', 'writable()', and such
>> synonyms for -r and -w that are more like 'use english' and less like
>> 'use English'.
i have a minor problem with the names readable and writeable. i am
c
John L. Allen wrote:
>
> I can't believe that special-casing the token -[rwxoRWXOezsfdlpSbctugkTBMAC]+
> is an acceptble solution. I mean think of all the existing perl keywords
> that that already matches: -pos, -cos, -lc, -uc, -fork, -use, -pop, -exp,
> -oct, -log, -ord + others!. A lot of
Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The ability to easily retrieve and edit your N most recent commands to the
> debugger (much like a bash_history).
and
> A better default pager. The default pager should assume a 24x80 term
> window ...
To me, these clearly indicates that the d
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> so fewer "cluttering"
> parentheses are needed to make things readable while still being correct.
Since when do parentheses make things less readable?
What is your definition of readable?
-- Johan
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> so fewer "cluttering"
> parentheses are needed to make things readable while still being correct.
By the same reasoning, you can reduce the use of curlies by using
indentation to define block structure.
-- Johan
"John L. Allen" wrote:
> The use of a caret was to prevent decimation of the user's namespace,
>
> perl -e 'print -^rwx $_'
> syntax error at -e line 1, near "-^"
> Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
The only problem I have with a caret is that to me th
Johan Vromans wrote:
> Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > so fewer "cluttering"
> > parentheses are needed to make things readable while still being correct.
>
> Since when do parentheses make things less readable?
> What is your definition of readable?
Can you say "lisp"?
--
Joh
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 01:14:05PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "JSD" == Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> I'll revise the RFC to add 'readable()', 'writable()', and such
> >> synonyms for -r and -w that are more like 'use english' and less like
> >> 'use English'.
John Porter wrote:
>
> Yeah, not to mention the fact that many modules, notably CGI.pm,
> are arranged to allow to use unquoted strings of the form -name:
>
> print textfield( -name => 'description' );
Well, this one's not an issue, because => auto-quotes the LHS. It's the
same as this:
> "AT" == Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AT> Maybe it'll be easier to rename the callbacks? They're common
AT> names with easily overloaded meanings, and should be reserved
AT> for the most common usage.
well, that is debatable. i rarely seem to use -X operators as i just
che
Dear Iain,
I had a few moments, so I tried to put together a subroutine that would
express what I was thinking. It's attached with the script that I used to
test it.
Grant M.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
lndxexmp.pl
lindex.pl
On 26 Sep 2000, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Perl6 RFC Librarian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The ability to easily retrieve and edit your N most recent commands to the
> > debugger (much like a bash_history).
> and
> > A better default pager. The default pager should assume a 24x80 term
> > win
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 02:13:41PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>
> and if the file test names are only loaded via a pragma it should be
> ok. it is not clear to me that you want that.
It's not clear that I want that either.
This is probably a plea for a subset of 'use english;', possibly
'use en
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 02:06:47PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > Since when do parentheses make things less readable?
>
> Can you say "lisp"?
"lisp".
(defun Schwartzian (func list)
(mapcar
(lambda (x) (car x))
(sort
(mapcar
(lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
list
Adam Turoff wrote:
>
> That's a stone's throw awaty from:
>
> import english
> from english import filetest
>
> result = filetest.readable("/dev/null")
>
> I think the common prefix idea is a nonstarter. There must be a way
> to coming up with sensible names for all of
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> I think perhaps that Uri was suggesting more a common letter prefix,
> such as:
>
> freadable($file);
> fwritable($file);
> fexecutable($file);
>
> Than a piece of bastardized Pythonesque syntax. ;-)
Was that what the foo.bar("baz") syntax was
Russ, you can use "perl -" to punch/paste into that window.
But "foo | perl" would not be affected as you would not
be running interactively. Essentially, only if there
are no arguments and stdin (and stdout) areatty would you
do that.
--tom, posting blind
Visit our website at http://www.ubswar
Yes, while still allowing an explicit A()->B(), of course.
I just meant that A->B means A::->B(), or, if you would, "A"->B().
But A()->B would not change in meaning.
--tom, posting blind(ly)
Visit our website at http://www.ubswarburg.com
This message contains confidential information and is int
Yes, Phil, I mean things like abs() meaning abs($_) and
localtime() meaning localtime(time).
Actually, combined with the paren requirement thingie, it means
localtime(time()), and localtime
has to be written localtime(). These are two different suggestions,
though.
This is an attempt at sendin
No, not for
use 'strict';
That is not a bareword. Hard to say why (have short time).
Only "$a = fred" is a bareword. But "require Module", is not,
as it has another meaning, and is accomodated in the grammar.
Likewise, a prototype of sub fn(*) is not a bareword when
you call fn(Whatever).
2000-09-26-05:18:57 Paris Sinclair:
> > (%alphabet) = $string =~ tr/a-z//;
>
> also a little more concise (and certainly more efficient...) than
>
> %alphabet = map { $_ => eval "\$string =~ tr/$_//" } (a..z);
However, compared to say
$hist[ord($_)]++ for split //, $string;
Simon Cozens wrote:
> (defun Schwartzian (func list)
> (mapcar
>(lambda (x) (car x))
>(sort
> (mapcar
> (lambda (x) (cons x (funcall func x)))
> list
> )
> (lambda (x y) (< (cdr x) (cdr y)))
> )
>)
> )
>
> Maybe you'd prefer this:
>
> defun Schwartzian
Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> Maybe you'd prefer this:
>
> defun Schwartzian func list mapcar lambda x car x sort mapcar
> lambda x cons x funcall func x list lambda x y < cdr x cdr y
What happened to the newlines?
Also, "no parens" is not the only alternative to having parens.
Other punctiation is
> "AT" == Adam Turoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
AT> On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 02:13:41PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
>>
AT> But I wouldn't want that pragma to override any other aspect of the
AT> core library, such as async I/O.
agreed. but we can reconcile the name spaces then. or le
> "NW" == Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
NW> I think perhaps that Uri was suggesting more a common letter prefix,
NW> such as:
NW> freadable($file);
NW> fwritable($file);
NW> fexecutable($file);
NW> Than a piece of bastardized Pythonesque syntax. ;-)
basically c
Uri Guttman wrote:
>
> not the best. would that be confused with a sub readable and a leading
> unary negation? in fact how does perl parse -r now vs - r()?
Yes it would, here's how Perl parses these right now:
perl -w -e '
sub r { local $\; print "&r(@_) : "; }
$\ = "\n";
print "-r" if -
On Mon, Sep 25, 2000 at 09:10:49PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
>if ( want->{count} > 2 ) { return $one, $two }
>
> Will that be interpreted as:
>
>'want'->{count}
>want()->{count}
>
> To be consistent, it should mean the first one. That is, the infix
> operator -> should always autoq
On Tue, Sep 26, 2000 at 12:43:07PM -0700, Robert Mathews wrote:
> Ok, you've proved that lisp doesn't make sense without all those
> annoying parentheses. Congratulations. Fortunately, perl isn't lisp.
Correct, John bringing lisp into the discussion *was* a canard.
--
Writing software is more
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Uri Guttman wrote:
> > "JSD" == Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> I'll revise the RFC to add 'readable()', 'writable()', and such
> >> synonyms for -r and -w that are more like 'use english' and less like
> >> 'use English'.
>
>
> i have a mi
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> 2000-09-26-05:18:57 Paris Sinclair:
> > > (%alphabet) = $string =~ tr/a-z//;
> >
> > also a little more concise (and certainly more efficient...) than
> >
> > %alphabet = map { $_ => eval "\$string =~ tr/$_//" } (a..z);
>
> However, compared t
2000-09-26-20:29:22 Paris Sinclair:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> > $hist[ord($_)]++ for split //, $string;
>
> But would technique work with unicode?
Beats me, I've never tried programming against unicode, as I don't
speak any other language than english I don't expect I will
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> Yup, I'm a sick little monkey who truly doesn't care about anything
> other than US-ASCII
Please keep your fetishes and/or geocentricism to yourself. There is no
need to propose that others should share them. If Perl is going to exist
into the future, i
2000-09-26-21:11:53 Paris Sinclair:
> Please keep your fetishes and/or geocentricism to yourself.
They get all ingrown and infested if I don't take 'em out and
air 'em out occasionally:-).
> There is no need to propose that others should share them.
No indeedy! I'm not opposed to i18n support i
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> That sounds positively noble when you put it that way. I can
> actually hear choirs of cherubim providing atmosphere.
I heard them also, but I thought it was the radio.
> > And yes, a list of 250 items to store 5 items is HUGE. There is no way to
> > kn
2000-09-26-21:56:04 Paris Sinclair:
> A "small" fixed upper bound? It is N that is bounded, that doesn't
> stop it from using N*50 variables to represent N, or N*150
> variables if I'm only matching vs 2 characters.
In big-O notation, the N is the size of the problem; in this case,
it could be th
kOn Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
> > What's the upper bound in a 16bit language? Or does that case just
> > have to break? "Sorry, you're not European. Please be assimilated
> > before using this tool. Resistance is futile."
>
> Lordie lordie lordie, you're one of the persecuted minorit
Paris Sinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> kOn Tue, 26 Sep 2000, Bennett Todd wrote:
>> Someone wrote:
>>> What's the upper bound in a 16bit language? Or does that case just
>>> have to break? "Sorry, you're not European. Please be assimilated
>>> before using this tool. Resistance is futile."
>Could you please start from the assumption that we're all interested in
>supporting the full Unicode space to the greatest degree possible? None
>of us are trying to force an ASCII-only alphabet on anyone (although some
>of us are interested in keeping ASCII-only operations fast and efficient
>s
Paris Sinclair <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But as soon as a person labels me a minority, and implies that because I
> have been labeled such that I am a rioter, and that my opinions are
> based upon this label, then your choices are to filter me, or to listen
> to me protest.
Then perhaps you
Uri Guttman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > "JSD" == Jonathan Scott Duff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> I'll revise the RFC to add 'readable()', 'writable()', and such
> >> synonyms for -r and -w that are more like 'use english' and less like
> >> 'use English'.
>
>
> i have a mi
On 27 Sep 2000 09:16:10 +0300, Ariel Scolnicov wrote:
>Another option is to stuff the long names into some namespace, and
>export them upon request (or maybe not export them, upon request).
Can you say "method"?
--
Bart.
51 matches
Mail list logo
