On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 06:34:12AM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> =head1 TITLE
>
> Perl should use XML for documentation instead of POD
No, it shouldn't. And I say that as an XML Evangelist.
> =head1 ABSTRACT
>
> Perl documentation should move to using XML as the formatting language,
>
On 29 Sep 2000 17:11:31 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>Just out of curiosity, and I'm not objecting to this RFC, has anyone
>reading this mailing list actually intentionally used a vertical tab for
>something related to its supposed purpose in the past ten years?
I agree. RFC's like this one seem l
On 1 Oct 2000 06:48:11 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>-r freadable()
>-R Freadable()
This still doesn't sound like an improvement. I can remember that -r
stands for readable, but the difference between -r and -R is very
obscure. How to remember which is which? The "English" counter
Adam Turoff, at 03:22 -0400 on Sun, 1 Oct 2000, wrote:
> POD has three mighty significant advantages over XML:
> - it is easy to learn
True, but XML is also easy to learn, and is more in-line with what the
user will probably already know, as covered in the RFC.
> - it is to write
True, bu
I'm afraid I had a family crisis yesterday, else another RFC would have been
submitted.
Part of Perl's problems, a severe internal problem that has external (user
side) consequences, is that Perl does *not* have anyone to speak policy with,
while the community itself is submerged in issues of
Realize that you are trying to convince a group who uses POD at the command
line (no, not everybody) to use a complete markup language. We're talking about
self-commenting code, sir, not a strict documentation system with indices and
the likes in any formal sense. Even if a documentation system
> The Perl-KGB-elite has got to go, and a free republic must replace
> it.
I wouldn't go as far as your entire post, neither in form nor content,
but I do have concerns about the sociopsycho(patho)logy of the Perl
community.
Personally I'm very concerned about the 'every RFC should have an
imple
It's valid to want to change the cultural makeup of perl6, but the
-language list is not the place for it. Try perl6-meta, and please
make concrete proposals. I see this "p5p sucks, we need something
better" as pointless unless there are definite ideas of what would
be better.
Nat
Bart Lateur wrote:
>
> On 1 Oct 2000 06:48:11 -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
>
> >-r freadable()
> >-R Freadable()
>
> This still doesn't sound like an improvement. I can remember that -r
> stands for readable, but the difference between -r and -R is very
> obscure. How to remember
At 05:17 PM 9/30/00 -0700, Damien Neil wrote:
>On Fri, Sep 29, 2000 at 07:24:38PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > $foo = """Things like ', ", and \ have no special meaning in here.""";
> >
> > Argh! *NO*! That way lies madness, or at least DCL's quoting mania. My
> > record, in a command proced
I am in the process of drafting a proposal, and have at a minimum split the
thread. However, thank you for pointing out which list this should go in. I'll
redirect further messages there.
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 11:56 AM, Nathan Torkington [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> It's valid to wa
On Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:02 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
wrote:
> > The Perl-KGB-elite has got to go, and a free republic must replace
> > it.
>
> I wouldn't go as far as your entire post, neither in form nor content,
> but I do have concerns about the sociopsycho(patho)logy
At 09:56 AM 10/1/00 -0500, David Grove wrote:
>Part of Perl's problems, a severe internal problem that has external (user
>side) consequences, is that Perl does *not* have anyone to speak policy with,
Yes, it does, as much as any piece of software can. For language issues
there's Larry. For inte
At 11:01 PM 10/1/00 +0200, Jean-Louis Leroy wrote:
>Personally I'm very concerned about the 'every RFC should have an
>implementation section' near-requirement.
This, I'll agree, is going over the top. It's a good requirement, since it
means people *must* think hard about how a feature will be b
Frank Tobin wrote:
>
> As covered, I'm worried POD will continually outgrow its original design,
> and become messier and messier.
I'd be interested to know what has caused you to be concerned about this.
>From what I can tell, the pod spec itself has changed very little over
the years; only the
Bart Lateur wrote:
>
> You don't declare Perl arrays. They just exist. Well... except for my'ed
> arrays.
>
> My idea is that if anybody sets $[ to 1 in a script, all accesses to
> array in that script would use 1 as the index of the very first item:
> $ary[1]. But if you pass this array (for ex
At 02:21 PM 10/1/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Bart Lateur wrote:
> >
> > You don't declare Perl arrays. They just exist. Well... except for my'ed
> > arrays.
> >
> > My idea is that if anybody sets $[ to 1 in a script, all accesses to
> > array in that script would use 1 as the index of the very
> "David" == David Grove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David> I was primarily addressing the issue of the P5P allowing the
David> language to be controlled by corporate presence through a
David> purchased pumking, and not taking responsibility for the
David> language sufficient to protect it ag
Peter Scott wrote:
> At 02:21 PM 10/1/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
> >
> > my @a :base(1);
> >
> >How do you set an attribute on a global variable?
>
> [indeed,] how do you apply the attribute to anonymous,
> let alone autovivified, arrays?
I believe that mentioning an attribute of a
> I believe that mentioning an attribute of a variable is
> really a method call on the variable's underlying object --
> which, in perl6, can have user-definable behavior.
> Where some language use dot or arrow syntax, perl uses colon.
> Very isomorphic.
> Please tell me I'm right! :-)
Pretty
I'd be all for the XML documentation idea, either as a replacement
for or as a substitute for POD. However, I'd like to note that if you
want XML documentation in your Perl code, POD really makes it easy:
=for XML (or DocBook, or whatever)
Simply require yourself to use only POD sections lik
At 02:52 PM 10/1/00 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>I believe that mentioning an attribute of a variable is
>really a method call on the variable's underlying object --
>which, in perl6, can have user-definable behavior.
>Where some language use dot or arrow syntax, perl uses colon.
>Very isomorphic.
>
We must not forget that pod has one other requirement, which pure
embedded XML would violate: namely, perl (that's the perl interpreter)
must be able to detect and skip over pod sections very quickly.
It would be very detrimental to perl's performance to have to do an
XML parse of every input sour
On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 09:56:43PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > Does this not imply that $[ should become lexically scoped?
> Or the function of $[ becomes per-array.
> (What would be the syntax to read and set it? pos @array?
> it seems to be syntactically legal but undef both as rval and lva
With respect to:
>=head1 TITLE
>_Dominant Value Expressions
>=head1 VERSION
>
>_Maintainer: Glenn Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>=head1 ABSTRACT
>
>An aid to determining if an input value has an impact on the result
>of an expression whole program. Can also be used for Perl p
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 09:49:31AM -0500, Frank Tobin wrote:
> Adam Turoff, at 03:22 -0400 on Sun, 1 Oct 2000, wrote:
> > POD has three mighty significant advantages over XML:
> > - it is easy to learn
>
> True, but XML is also easy to learn, and is more in-line with what the
> user will proba
Bart Lateur wrote:
>
> My idea is that if anybody sets $[ to 1 in a script, all accesses to
> array in that script would use 1 as the index of the very first item:
> $ary[1]. But if you pass this array (for example, a reference to it) to
> a function in a module that doesn't set $[, it would acce
> Two of POD's deficiencies are list handling and table handling. POD
> doesn't handle tables right now, but calling this easy to write
> or easy to read is ludicrous:
[horrendous XHTML and DocBook notations deleted]
> I think POD's list handling is full of warts, but what follows
> is much be
Nathan Wiger writes:
> > True, C<> and E<> are pretty warty, but they clearly identify
> > something more presentational in nature.
>
> Yes, this is true. I think it's pretty apparent that the <> syntax is
> broken - there's too much stuff (like -> and <>) that uses duplicate
> characters. This c
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 12:37:55PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Bart Lateur wrote:
> >
> > My idea is that if anybody sets $[ to 1 in a script, all accesses to
> > array in that script would use 1 as the index of the very first item:
> > $ary[1]. But if you pass this array (for example, a referen
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 02:30:39PM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Nathan Wiger writes:
> > > True, C<> and E<> are pretty warty, but they clearly identify
> > > something more presentational in nature.
> >
> > Yes, this is true. I think it's pretty apparent that the <> syntax is
> > broken - t
At 11:33 AM 10/1/00 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>But, setting aside my visceral reaction to changing array bases, you have
>precisely the same problem here that has scuppered my intent to file an
>RFC for hashes with fixed keys; how do you apply the attribute to
>anonymous, let alone autovivified
Nicholas Clark wrote:
>
> No-one ever did suggest adding « and » to the list of matched delimiters
> that q() etc support, did they? :-)
Yes, Larry did. Though not here, not recently.
Sorry I don't have a reference.
--
John Porter
At 04:53 PM 10/1/00 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>At 11:33 AM 10/1/00 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
>>But, setting aside my visceral reaction to changing array bases, you have
>>precisely the same problem here that has scuppered my intent to file an
>>RFC for hashes with fixed keys; how do you apply t
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 03:39:51PM -0400, Adam Turoff wrote:
> I think POD's list handling is full of warts, but what follows
> is much better than HTML/DocBook itemized lists:
For me, they're about the same.
Actually, I'd rather read an XHTML/HTML itemized list than a POD one;
they both look ug
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 02:00:20PM -0500, J. David Blackstone wrote:
> While POD hasn't changed for several years, the QA group has a
> couple of ideas in the works to morph it in desireable ways that might
> be easier if POD were replaced with an XML DTD.
^
Okay, followups to this belong in -meta (alas Eudora doesn't let you set
reply-to's, or I would), so if everyone would, please?
At 12:14 PM 10/1/00 -0500, David Grove wrote:
>On Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:02 PM, Jean-Louis Leroy [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>wrote:
> > > The Perl-KGB-elite has got t
> *All* communities have this. It's the nature of people. Pretending it might
> be otherwise is to paint a rather pleasant utopian fantasy that,
> unfortunately, can't exist. (At least not one that has people in it) It's
> one of the common failings of people involved in open source projects.
> As
On Sun, Oct 01, 2000 at 11:49:51AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> David> I was primarily addressing the issue of the P5P allowing the
> David> language to be controlled by corporate presence through a
> David> purchased pumking, and not taking responsibility for the
> David> language suffic
Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 11:33 AM 10/1/00 -0700, Peter Scott wrote:
> >But, setting aside my visceral reaction to changing array bases, you have
> >precisely the same problem here that has scuppered my intent to file an
> >RFC for hashes with fixed keys; how do you apply the attribute to
> >anonym
> I haven't got around to RFCing the more generic version (that all attributes
> are inherited inside nested data types), but that would certainly be a nice
> approach.
RFC 337...the new version I just sent in says:
This would allow those who want to to warp Perl OO into Java
or Python or
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Immediate subroutines
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Jean-Louis Leroy
Date: 4 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 1 Oct 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 18
Version: 2
Status: Frozen
=head1 ABSTRA
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Heredoc contents
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Richard Proctor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 27 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 1 Oct 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 162
Version: 2
Status: Froze
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Common attribute system to allow user-defined, extensible attributes
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 28 Sep 2000
Last Modified: 1 Oct 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROT
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Elements of @_ should be read-only by default
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: John Tobey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 28 Sep 2000
Last Modified: 1 Oct 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 344
Ve
45 matches
Mail list logo
