At 4:54 PM +1000 6/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
>Even if Larry decides against superpositions, there will definitely be some
>kind of non-quantum iterator syntax that supports these kinds of permuted
>sequences.
Vicki sez:
Larry? Oh, Larrry.
Pretty please include quantum superpos
> Rich sez:
>But make Damian use "es", rather than "egs" for the
>eigenstate ("is" :-) operator.
No, no, no! "any" and "all" are three letters, so the eigenstate operator has
to be as well. And since the eigenstates are *examples" of the possible states
of a superposition, "egs" i
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.
--Josh
At 23:31 on 06/05/2002 BST, Nicholas Clark
At 6:10 PM +1000 6/6/02, Damian Conway wrote:
>> Rich sez:
>> But make Damian use "es", rather than "egs" for the
>> eigenstate ("is" :-) operator.
s/"is"/"it"/, above (blush). That is, the superposition _could_ be in
any of several states, but the eigenstate tells us what "it"
On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
rules" for that type of thing... :)
-John
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 10:38:39AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
> On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> > rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
>
> No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
> rules" for that type of thing... :)
No, because rules are basically met
#Preliminary Perl6::Regex
# This does not have any actions, but otherwise I think is correct.
# Let me know if it's right or not.
use 6;
grammar Perl6::Regex {
rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
rule
At 11:31 AM 06-06-2002 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
>#Preliminary Perl6::Regex
># This does not have any actions, but otherwise I think is correct.
># Let me know if it's right or not.
I'm not a regex guru, but...
>use 6;
>
>grammar Perl6::Regex {
> rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>
On Thu, 6 Jun 2002, Buddha Buck wrote:
> At 11:31 AM 06-06-2002 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
> I had gotten the impression that a literal string separated by whitespace
> was an atom, so
>
> rule foofoobar { foo <1,2> bar }
>
> would match 'foobar' or 'foofoobar'. If so, I think needs to
> be re
Whew! I've carefully (well, I tried to be careful :-) read through
Apocalypse 5 twice now and it still makes my head hurt (but in a good
way). What follows is some notes that I jotted down and am tired of
looking at. Please correct any misconceptions and feel free to add
where I've omitted.
He
Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 10:38:39AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
>> On 6/6/02 2:43 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
>> > rule wordlist { (\w+) [ , (\w+) ]* }
>>
>> No semicolon at the end of that line? I've already forgotten the "new
>> rules" for that type
On Thu, Jun 06, 2002 at 08:21:25PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > No, because rules are basically methods, just like grammars are
> > basically classes. You would only need a semi-colon if you were defining
> > an anonymous C (similar to an anonymous
Larry discounted RFC261 in A5, but I think there's some good in it. The
biggest problem is not that it's hard to do in Perl6, but that 80-90% of
it is ALREADY done in Perl5! Once you peel away that portion of the RFC,
you get to Perl5's limitations and what Perl6 might do to support these
things.
Brent Dax wrote:
> grammar Perl6::Regex {
> rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
>
> rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
Or just:
rule ws { [\s|\#\N*]* }
> rule atom { ( | \\ . | ) }
>
> rule m
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
> Brent Dax wrote:
>
> > grammar Perl6::Regex {
> > rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
> >
> > rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
>
> Or just:
>
> rule ws { [\s|\#\N*]*
Larry Wall:
# On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
#
# > Brent Dax wrote:
# >
# > > grammar Perl6::Regex {
# > > rule metachar { <[<{(\[\])}>:*+?\\|]>}
# > >
# > > rule ws { [<[\h\v]>|\#\N*]*}
# >
# > Or just:
# >
# > rule ws
Well, A5 definitely has my head spinning. The new features seem amazingly
powerful...it almost feels like we're going to have two equally powerful,
equally complex languages living side-by-side: one of them is called
"Perl" and the other one is called "Regexes". Although they may talk to
one an
Dave Storrs wrote:
> I admit I'm a bit nervous about that...so far, I'm completely sold on
> (basically) all the new features and changes in Perl 6, and I'm eagerly
> anticipating working with them. But this level of change...I don't know.
> I've spent a lot of time getting to be (reasonaly) goo
At 10:59 PM -0700 6/6/02, Dave Storrs wrote:
>Page 8:
>
>The u1-u3 mods all say "level 1 support". I assume this was a typo, and
>they should go (u1 => 'level 1', u2 => 'level 2', u3 => 'level 3').
Yeah. I'd avoid these if you can manage. There's not a whole lot of
reason to mandate Unicode in
Note: My answers are non-authoritative. Don't trust me.
> Can we please have a 'reverse x' modifier that means "treat whitespace as
> literals"? Yes, we are living in a Unicode world now and your data could
> theoretically be coming in from a different character set than expected.
> But there
20 matches
Mail list logo
