Good stuff. Sounds halfway between CPAN.pm and activestate's ppm. See
also debian's apt-get.
Which brings me to my pet peeve- I think it's time to start doing binary
packaging in CPAN, for those who don't want to bother with compilation.
That has interesting implications for how we deal wi
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 01:11:58PM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> On 6/4/02 12:59 PM, "Steve Simmons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> claimed:
>
> > Actually, for 6PAN I think they should have to pass. And maybe we
> > need a bug submission setup, and status checks, and . . . OK, OK, I'll
> > stop now. They
[For those of you coming in late, here's the relevent thread from
perl6-language
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10024.html
]
Some of you may or may not be aware that I hate waiting, especially when
it's about good ideas for Perl 6. Some of you may also be aware of the
CPANPLUS project to reimpleme
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 04:15:02PM -0400, John Siracusa wrote in
response to me:
> > Frankly, I'd argue that nothing in 6PAN ought to be in alpha/beta state.
> . . .
> Nah, I think it's useful to be able to upload "unstable" versions to 6PAN to
> get the widest possible audience of testers. It'
On 6/5/02 2:59 PM, Steve Simmons wrote:
> Sticking just to the disk-intensive issue for a moment --
> [...]
> With the new one, we seem to have agreed that `most recent' will be
> used, not `first found'. That means that every tree must be probed,
> and probed with globs or sub-searches to match
hmm.
Just read (skimmed) apocalypse 5, had one concern - it looks like we are on a
serious collision course with parsing the various *mls.
before:
m#..etc#
after
m#\\\#
Also, the space being backslashed sort of bugs me. Surely there is going to be
a 'non-x' modifier? And perhaps a modifier t
At 2:59 PM -0400 6/5/02, Steve Simmons wrote:
>My seat of the pants number say our current tools (which use DBI to
>access databases) spend about as 10% of their CPU and wall clock time
>in compilation. This is measured by deliberately running the tools
>with an error (bad switch) vs running it c
At 12:55 AM -0400 6/5/02, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>Good stuff. Sounds halfway between CPAN.pm and activestate's ppm. See
>also debian's apt-get.
>
>Which brings me to my pet peeve- I think it's time to start doing binary
>packaging in CPAN, for those who don't want to bother with compilation.
>
>Tha
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
# Just read (skimmed) apocalypse 5, had one concern - it looks
# like we are on a serious collision course with parsing the
# various *mls.
#
# before:
#
# m#..etc#
#
# after
#
# m#\\\#
That's intentional. What will that regex do with this?
That's interpreted
--
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 13:21:39
Brent Dax wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
># Just read (skimmed) apocalypse 5, had one concern - it looks
># like we are on a serious collision course with parsing the
># various *mls.
>#
># before:
>#
># m#..etc#
>#
># after
>#
># m#\\\#
>
>That's intentiona
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Just read (skimmed) apocalypse 5, had one concern - it looks like we are on a
> serious collision course with parsing the various *mls.
>
> before:
>
> m#..etc#
>
> after
>
> m#\\\#
>
> Also, the space being backslashed sort of bugs me. Surely th
On Wed, Jun 05, 2002 at 12:55:36AM -0400, Josh Wilmes wrote:
>
> Good stuff. Sounds halfway between CPAN.pm and activestate's ppm. See
> also debian's apt-get.
>
> Which brings me to my pet peeve- I think it's time to start doing binary
> packaging in CPAN, for those who don't want to bothe
I just read through A5 (wow, that's long), and I agree with most of it.
Some of it's really cool. Here's what makes me uneasy: The fact that a
grammar rule auto-captures into a variable of its name.
Is this efficient? If I'm writing a syntax-directed translator, I usually
don't need to captu
> For the record, you will hear no disagreement from me. I recognize that
> this is a HARD problem. Nonetheless, I think it's an important one, and
> solving it (even imperfectly, by only supporting well-defined platforms)
> would be a major coup.
I'd like to take that even further: just suppor
As always, most of it is great. so only the niggles get discussed.
On page 7, the following example is given:
$oldpos = pos $string;
$string =~ m/... <( .pos == $oldpos )> .../;
This implies that match position is associated with the string. This worries
me. If 2 threads are matching on
At 4:52 PM -0700 6/5/02, David Whipp wrote:
>As always, most of it is great. so only the niggles get discussed.
>
>On page 7, the following example is given:
>
> $oldpos = pos $string;
> $string =~ m/... <( .pos == $oldpos )> .../;
>
>This implies that match position is associated with the
Page 13 tells use about C decls. But it also says that the topic must
be a regex. Whilst it explains that this isn't really a problem, I'm not
sure that it justifies it. So perhaps someone can clarify why this
(hypothetical) code in not a reasonable generalization:
our $foo = 0;
sub do_somethin
You have I how often that would have been useful. It's a great
exception safety mechanism... like C++'s "resource aquisition is
initialization" thingy, but without having to write a class for every
variable.
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, David Whipp wrote:
> Page 13 tells use about C decls. But it als
First, a slight clarification: if I say:
m:w/ %foo := [ (\w+) = (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* ] /
does this give me a hash of arrays? (i.e. is the rhs of a hash processed as
a scalar context)
When I look at this, I see a common pattern: the join/split concept. It
feels like there should be a standard a
I'd like to be able to use REs to generate lists of strings. For
example, it might be nice to create a loop such as:
for $i (sort(p:p5|[0-9A-F]{2}|)) { # "p" operator for "production"?
and have $i walk from '00' through 'FF'. Or whatever.
I created a specialized macro-preprocessor several
Luke Palmer wrote:
> I just read through A5 (wow, that's long), and I agree with most of it.
> Some of it's really cool. Here's what makes me uneasy: The fact that a
> grammar rule auto-captures into a variable of its name.
>
> Is this efficient? If I'm writing a syntax-directed translator, I u
> Page 13 tells use about C decls. But it also says that the topic must
> be a regex. Whilst it explains that this isn't really a problem, I'm not
> sure that it justifies it. So perhaps someone can clarify why this
> (hypothetical) code in not a reasonable generalization:
Because Perl code doesn
You have I how often that would have been useful. It's a great
> exception safety mechanism... like C++'s "resource aquisition is
> initialization" thingy, but without having to write a class for every
> variable.
Have you already forgotten KEEP and UNDO (that we introduced in A4/E4):
our $
David Whipp wrote:
>
> First, a slight clarification: if I say:
>
> m:w/ %foo := [ (\w+) = (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* ] /
>
> does this give me a hash of arrays? (i.e. is the rhs of a hash processed as
> a scalar context)
That's an error. The grouping bound to a hypothetical hash has to have
either
Rich Morin wrote:
> I'd like to be able to use REs to generate lists of strings. For
> example, it might be nice to create a loop such as:
>
>for $i (sort(p:p5|[0-9A-F]{2}|)) { # "p" operator for "production"?
>
> and have $i walk from '00' through 'FF'. Or whatever.
You mean:
25 matches
Mail list logo
