Those new properties thingies are looking powerful. Does this mean we
can now do:
sub decorate ($obj) {
$obj is ad_hoc_method(sub {...});
}
and expect C<$obj.ad_hoc_method(...)> to call the appropriate
subroutine?
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 12:32:40PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> Since it's something underlying Perl, I'd suggest a decrement of
> "Perl", which would of course be "Perk". The Java engine would have
> to be "Perj", I guess, which seems fitting somehow.
Shouldn't the Java engine be "Perk" (or perha
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 03:53:53PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> the larger question remains, is sandboxing something a language
> should support at all, or is it best left to the OS to provide
> a solid chroot facility?
CPANTS will have to try and clunk a sandbox together and I have no
illusion
On Thu, 03 May 2001 22:14:47 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
>I am going to miss doublequoting being the default quoting for
>here strings. I find that to be a very nice optimization and
>would like to know more about the reasoning behind taking it
>away.
I was already panicking when I saw this me
At 12:03 PM 5/4/2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>Sure, Unix has ulimits, ipchains, quotas,
>etc... but what about the DumbOS's and the AncientOS's?
You'll want to be careful of the epithets there. For this stuff the world
is really divided into single-user and multi-user OSes. Unix ranks do
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:20:13AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Building a good sandbox with resource limits on a VMS system is trivial. I
> expect it may even be easier with IBM's big iron OSes.
I'm sure it is. I'm just worried about having lots of:
if( $^O =~ /VMS/ ) {
do
Piers Cawley wrote:
> sub decorate ($obj) {
> $obj is ad_hoc_method(sub {...});
> }
> and expect C<$obj.ad_hoc_method(...)>
And btw . . . Wouldn't
$thing has property
make more sense than
$thing is property
???
"Is" usually implies a generalization link,
not
Bart Lateur wrote:
> I hardly ever restrict
> myself to word characters in the end delimiter, anyway.
Interesting -- I *always* use "EOF", because that's the
only one vim knows a priori how to highlight correctly. :-/
--
John Porter
It's so mysterious, the land of tears.
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:51:53AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> And btw . . . Wouldn't
>
> $thing has property
>
> make more sense than
>
> $thing is property
"$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true". Dunno quite
what the other expected uses are.
--
Michael G. Sc
> Memory limits we should be able to do, assuming Perl 6 continues to
> have its own malloc.
Well... Perl doesn't use it's own malloc *that* widely. E.g. Linux
doesn't, since at least 5.005_03. FreeBSD doesn't. OpenBSD doesn't.
Darwin doesn't. AIX doesn't. IRIX doesn't. Starting from 5.8.0
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:03:05AM -0500, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > Memory limits we should be able to do, assuming Perl 6 continues to
> > have its own malloc.
>
> Well... Perl doesn't use it's own malloc *that* widely.
Who knows what Perl 6 will do internally, but we'll probably have some
s
At 03:00 PM 05-04-2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:51:53AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > And btw . . . Wouldn't
> >
> > $thing has property
> >
> > make more sense than
> >
> > $thing is property
>
>"$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true"
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> "$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true".
But the general form, something like
$thing is a_property
or
$thing is a_behavior
flows considerably worse, IMHO.
--
John Porter
It's so mysterious, the land of tears.
Michael G Schwern writes:
> "$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true". Dunno quite
> what the other expected uses are.
$foo has truth; # :-)
This leads naturally to:
$foo has the_buddha_nature;
$foo has ten_days_to_live;
$foo has meddled_in_my_affairs_one_too_many_times!
From: Buddha Buck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> At 03:00 PM 05-04-2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> >On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:51:53AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > > And btw . . . Wouldn't
> > >
> > > $thing has property
> > >
> > > make more sense than
> > >
> > > $thing is pro
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:47:18AM -0600, Nathan Torkington wrote:
> Michael G Schwern writes:
> > "$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true". Dunno quite
> > what the other expected uses are.
>
> $foo has truth; # :-)
>
> This leads naturally to:
>
> $foo has the_buddha_natur
@pi are square;
@dogs have fleas;
@talks have stalled;
--
John Porter
On Fri, 4 May 2001 10:49:48 -0500 , Garrett Goebel wrote:
>> > > And btw . . . Wouldn't
>> > >
>> > > $thing has property
>> > >
>> > > make more sense than
>> > >
>> > > $thing is property
>> >
>> >"$foo has true" doesn't flow as well as "$foo is true". Dunno quite
>> >what the oth
At 10:49 AM 05-04-2001 -0500, Garrett Goebel wrote:
>From: Buddha Buck [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > At 03:00 PM 05-04-2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> > >On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:51:53AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> > > > And btw . . . Wouldn't
> > > >
> > > > $thing has property
>
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:51:43AM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> @pi are square;
Pi are round. Cake are square.
--
Tad McClellan SGML consulting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Perl programming
Fort Worth, Texas
Edward Peschko writes:
: Anyways, my one curiosity that sticks out would be: why \Q as being a way to
: disambiguate? You could do the same thing with:
:
: print "$foo\[1]\n"
: vs
: print "$foo[1]\n";
Not good enough. Consider what this might means:
m/$foo\[a-z]\n/
Is it matching a litera
In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I believe this may be
ambiguious.
It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is also being
proposed for a null token disambiguate context. As in $foo\Q[bar].
But if it is spliting $foo and {this is in curlies} this will be taken
> >is => typing, inheritance, etc.
> >has => composition, aggregation, etc.
>
> True, but those are basic OO concepts, which don't neatly apply to
> property-lists (a very old Lisp concept that Perl6 is adopting).
"is" does seem to imply an OO is-a relationship. So lets run
with it!
If $foo i
Richard Proctor writes:
: In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I believe this may be
: ambiguious.
:
: It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is also being
: proposed for a null token disambiguate context. As in $foo\Q[bar].
Hmm, yes, that's a problem. I'd for
Larry Wall writes:
: Richard Proctor writes:
: : In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I believe this may be
: : ambiguious.
: :
: : It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is also being
: : proposed for a null token disambiguate context. As in $foo\Q[bar].
:
: H
From: Larry Wall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Richard Proctor writes:
> : In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I
> : believe this may be ambiguious.
> :
> : It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is
> : also being proposed for a null token disambiguate context.
At 11:10 AM 5/4/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Larry Wall writes:
>: Richard Proctor writes:
>: : In Apocalypse 2, \Q is being used for two things, and I believe this
>may be
>: : ambiguious.
>: :
>: : It has the current \Quote meaning admitibly \Q{oute} it is also being
>: : proposed for a null
At 02:46 PM 5/4/2001 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 09:20:13AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Building a good sandbox with resource limits on a VMS system is trivial. I
> > expect it may even be easier with IBM's big iron OSes.
>
>I'm sure it is. I'm just worried about h
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 03:05:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
> the less pleasant looking bits? $foo<<1>> (where << and >> are the double
> angle characters) as an alternative to $foo\Q[1] if the user's got the
> chara
On Fri, 04 May 2001 15:05:12 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
>the less pleasant looking bits? $foo<<1>> (where << and >> are the double
>angle characters) as an alternative to $foo\Q[1] if the user's got the
>characters han
At 11:33 PM 5/4/2001 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote:
>On Fri, 04 May 2001 15:05:12 -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> >Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
> >the less pleasant looking bits? $foo<<1>> (where << and >> are the double
> >angle characters) as an alternativ
At 10:11 PM 5/4/2001 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 03:05:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
> > the less pleasant looking bits? $foo<<1>> (where << and >> are the double
> > angle characters) as an al
Dan Sugalski writes:
: Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
: the less pleasant looking bits? $foo<<1>> (where << and >> are the double
: angle characters) as an alternative to $foo\Q[1] if the user's got the
: characters handy?
Actually, my first thought
> Too many dead parrot jokes? Too many lousy acronyms?
>
> Platform-Agnostic Rabidly Rapid Object Thrasher
well, it doesn't have to be underlined by an acronym.. and if you don't like
parrot, how about a play on the name w/'polly'?
> Urque.
>
> Since it's something underlying Perl, I'd s
There's a lot of good stuff in Apoc2, but I did have at least one
semantic concern. In it, there's this proposal:
: There is likely to be no need for an explicit input operator in Perl 6,
: and I want the angles for something else. I/O handles are a subclass of
: iterators, and I think general it
Not a problem. \Q means quotemeta, except immediately following
a interpolated identifier. You want to start metaquoting immediately
after a curious interpolation? use \Q\Q.
I have been regularly, since I fingured out how, doing things like
print "the time is now ${\(~~localtime)}[
if we kept <> with their current meaning but added it
as a handier whitespace quoter I would like that.
p5:
@things = < one two three four five>;
_is_ currently a syntax error. In my mind. Not in my 5.005_03.
however, where it appears to behave just like qw does,
except that it does in
At 03:51 PM 5/4/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Dan Sugalski writes:
>: Have you considered allowing Unicode characters as alternatives to some of
>: the less pleasant looking bits? $foo<<1>> (where << and >> are the double
>: angle characters) as an alternative to $foo\Q[1] if the user's got the
>
David L. Nicol writes:
: Not a problem. \Q means quotemeta, except immediately following
: a interpolated identifier. You want to start metaquoting immediately
: after a curious interpolation? use \Q\Q.
The word "except" should be a red flag that you're trying to define an
exception. We're try
Edward Peschko writes:
: also - why does it have to be tied to perl (in name) at all?
Er, because we're writing it?
: I like the idea
: that it would *not* be tied to perl, ie: it would be more generic if it was
: not named after it.
Well, the fact that Tcl and Tk both start with T didn't st
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> : while ($STDIN) { ... }
> I'm wondering what this will do?
>$thingy = $STDIN;
> This seems to have two possibilities:
>1. Make a copy of $STDIN
This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning "read to $_",
jus
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 07:34:24PM -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
> @things = < one two three four five>;
>
> _is_ currently a syntax error. In my mind. Not in my 5.005_03.
> however, where it appears to behave just like qw does,
> except that it does interpolation, which qw does not.
And s
> > I'm wondering what this will do?
> >$thingy = $STDIN;
> > This seems to have two possibilities:
> >1. Make a copy of $STDIN
>
> This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning "read to $_",
> just like the current "while ()" magic we all know and occasio
[apologies if this is a duplicate, but my mail's been dropping]
There's a lot of good stuff in Apoc2, but I did have at least one
semantic concern. In it, there's this proposal:
: There is likely to be no need for an explicit input operator in Perl 6,
: and I want the angles for something else.
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 11:13:40AM +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
>> love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an
>
> $STDIN.next is the current plan.
Ah, OK. Crystal ball was a bit cloudy there.
--
Putting heated bricks close to the news.admin.net-abuse.* groups.
Simon Cozens writes:
: On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
: > : while ($STDIN) { ... }
: > I'm wondering what this will do?
: >$thingy = $STDIN;
: > This seems to have two possibilities:
: >1. Make a copy of $STDIN
:
: This one. I see a filehandle in *boole
> : This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning "read to $_",
> : just like the current "while ()" magic we all know and occasionally
> : love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an
> : explicit readline to a variable other than $_
>
> It would be $FOO.next, b
Dan Sugalski writes:
: That's cool. I was just thinking it might not be a bad idea for us to set=20
: some equivalencies up in advance. If not, that's fine too. (I'll just slip=
: =20
: them in while you're not looking... :)
Hmm. Harks back to the colonial era: "I claim these brackets in the
nam
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> I'm wondering what this will do?
>
>$thingy = $STDIN;
>
> This seems to have two possibilities:
>
>1. Make a copy of $STDIN
>
>2. Read a line from $STDIN
While perhaps inconsistent, I'd really rather it did #2. Here'
Has anyone suggested "Oyster", or is that too obvious?
__
Matt Youell - "Think different, just like everyone else."
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.youell.com/matt/
> While perhaps inconsistent, I'd really rather it did #2. Here's the
> basic argument... compare how often you dup a filehandle with how
> often you read from one. Duping is swamped by several orders of
> magnitude. Dup with $fh = $STDIN.copy; (or whatever). $line =
> $STDIN.next should still
From: "Michael G Schwern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Nathan Wiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 9:46 PM
> On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > I'm wondering what this will do?
> >$thingy = $STDIN;
> > This seems to have two possibilities:
> >1.
From: "Nathan Wiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2001 10:02 PM
Subject: Re: Apoc2 - concerns
> You know, I hear what you're saying, but it really makes the little hairs
on
> my neck stand up. Just imaging trying to teach this:
>$a = $b;# assignment or
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 07:02:14PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > While perhaps inconsistent, I'd really rather it did #2. Here's the
> > basic argument... compare how often you dup a filehandle with how
> > often you read from one. Duping is swamped by several orders of
> > magnitude. Dup with
First off, before I forget to mention it, nice job on Apoc2 Larry! You are
the man. I know alot of us on p6l can seem like harsh critics at times, but
it's only because we love Perl so much. ;-)
Anyways, in addition to the $file.next stuff, I'm curious about a few
clarifications on the new semant
> I'm interested in what happens with interactions:
>
>$a = @b;
>
> Does this:
>
>1. Get the length (doesn't seem to make sense now)
No. length(@b) or @b.length() for that.
>2. Pull a reference to @b (like Perl5's "$a = \@b")
Yep. Scalar context eval of a
Nathan Wiger writes:
: > : This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning "read to $_",
: > : just like the current "while ()" magic we all know and occasionally
: > : love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an
: > : explicit readline to a variable other than $_
>>$a = @b;
>>
>>2. Pull a reference to @b (like Perl5's "$a = \@b")
>
> Yep. Scalar context eval of arrays, hashes, and subs produces a reference.
Perfect.
>> Similarly, how about:
>>
>>%c = @d;
>>
>> Does this:
>>
>>1. Create a hash w/ alt
> We do have to worry about the C loop control function though.
> It's possible that in
>
> FOO: while (1) {
> next FOO if /foo/;
> ...
> }
>
> the C label is actually being recognized as a pseudo-package
> name! The loop could well be an object whose full name is C.
> Or something like t
> : also - why does it have to be tied to perl (in name) at all?
>
> Er, because we're writing it?
>
> : I like the idea
> : that it would *not* be tied to perl, ie: it would be more generic if it was
> : not named after it.
>
> Well, the fact that Tcl and Tk both start with T didn't stop pe
On 5/4/01 11:09 PM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> The real trick is what to do with these:
Note: stabbing wildly here... :)
> %a = (%b, %c);
%a = (stringify(\%b) => \%c); # Perl 5-ish
%a = (%b.str => %c); # Perl 6 equiv.
> %d = (@e, @f);
%d = (stringify(\@e) => \@f); # Perl 5-ish
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:23:12PM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> On 5/4/01 11:09 PM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > The real trick is what to do with these:
>
> Note: stabbing wildly here... :)
>
> > %a = (%b, %c);
>
> %a = (stringify(\%b) => \%c); # Perl 5-ish
> %a = (%b.str => %c);
On 5/4/01 11:47 PM, Edward Peschko wrote:
> Horrors is right. The default perl5 behaviour is *useful*. I use the
> %b=(%a,%c)
> metaphor all of the time.
I believe you can get the Perl 5 functionality by throwing a few *
characters in there somewhere...
> Why not just keep it simple?
Based on A
> Horrors is right. The default perl5 behaviour is *useful*. I use the
%b=(%a,%c)
> metaphor all of the time.
>
> Why not just keep it simple? And perl5-ish. Two contexts, scalar and list,
> hashes NOT a context of its own.
I agree. But what to do with:
(%a, %b) = (%c, %d);
Surely that shoul
On 5/5/01 12:06 AM, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Maybe we need a way to say "flatten these together".
> I'm going to throw out a new ":" op here:
[snip]
> Hmmm... I kinda like that... Am I missing anything?
Maybe the fact that Larry's already claimed the colon? :)
-John
As a . doubter form the earlier threads, I'd just like to say that Apoc. 2
has gone a long way towards making me feel better about . as the method call
thingie...both by explaining all the neat things . does in Perl 6, and by
avoiding the potentially distressing introduction of the replacement str
> Maybe we need a new flattening operator. I don't think the proposed := by
> itself would do everything we need to do. Maybe we need a way to say
> "flatten these together". I'm going to throw out a new ":" op here:
>
>%a = (%b, %c); # same as %a = %b
>%a = (%b : %c);# fl
At 07:56 PM 5/4/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Nathan Wiger writes:
>: > : This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning "read to $_",
>: > : just like the current "while ()" magic we all know and occasionally
>: > : love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pascalish) to do an
>
At 06:40 PM 5/4/2001 -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
>Dan Sugalski writes:
>: That's cool. I was just thinking it might not be a bad idea for us to
>: set some equivalencies up in advance. If not, that's fine too. (I'll just
>: slip them in while you're not looking... :)
>
>Hmm. Harks back to the coloni
Dan Sugalski writes:
> I dunno. Color me unconvinced--I do use the <> enough in non-while context
> (and in non-implied while context) to make the whole idea of next feel
> rather... nasty. And $FOO.next? Yuck. Reading lines/records in is one of
> the most fundamental things one can do in a co
On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 07:56:39PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> Nathan Wiger writes:
> : > : This one. I see a filehandle in *boolean* context meaning "read to $_",
> : > : just like the current "while ()" magic we all know and occasionally
> : > : love. I'd expect $FOO.readln (or something less Pas
On Sat, May 05, 2001 at 02:46:46AM +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> > I'm wondering what this will do?
> >
> >$thingy = $STDIN;
> >
> > This seems to have two possibilities:
> >
> >1. Make a copy of $STDIN
> >
> >2. R
> >:$FH = open "<$file" or die "Can't open $file: $!";
> >:$line = next $FH;
> >:
> >: If so, I can live with that.
> >
> >Yes, that's the reason it's C, and not something more specific
> >like C, which isn't even true in Perl 5 when $/ is mungled.
>
> I dunno. Color me unconvinced--I do u
In lists.projects.perl.language, you wrote:
>It's likely to work better in Perl 6. To mean what it currently
>means, you'll probably have to write something like:
>
>@foo[0] := ;
>
>The colon here is not functioning merely to make the assignment look
>like Pascal. It means, in this case,
74 matches
Mail list logo
