[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mr. Nobody) writes:
> We can't use « or ». Not only are they impossible to type on some editors,
> but they're different in CP437 (the DOS charset), Latin1, and UTF8.
We've done this.
--
I've looked at the listing, and it's right!
-- Joel Halpern
Philip Hellyer wrote:
Damian's proposal didn't say anything about array params. If I understood
him correctly, then this should print "FOO" on standard out:
my $foo = "FOO";
$foo ~> print;
Correct.
The opposite 'squiggly arrow' fiddles the indirect object, so perhaps this
would pri
Jonathan Scott Duff suggested:
> Oh, then we just need a syntax to split the streams. ... I know!
>
> @list ~| grep /bad!/ ~> @throw ~| grep /good/ ~> @keep;
Unfortunately, that's already taken (it's the bitwise-OR-on-a-string operator).
Fortunately that doesn't matter, since no extra bina
frederic fabbro wrote:
I'm not even sure how that would parse, though that:
>
@keep <~ grep /good/ <~ @list ~> grep /bad!/ ~> @throw;
>
would go like:
>
( @keep <~ grep /good/ <~ @list ) ~> grep /bad!/ ~> @throw;
Correct, if <~ is indeed slightly higher precedence than ~>
which is pro
Rafael Garcia-Suarez asked:
> Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>There are in fact *two* types associated with any Perl variable
>
> How does it work regarding inheritance and polymorphism ?
> E.g. consider
> my @a is Set of Apple;
> my @b is Basket of Fruit;
> with Apple isa Fruit,
Chris Dutton wrote:
For example, I'm struggling to see how one could use the [*] to do this:
@names = «Gödel Escher Bach»;
@ages = $today »-« %date_of_birth{@names}
While I agree that hyper-operators are the better way to go(though I can
see advantages either way), I was bored, s
Andy Wardley wrote:
I also think this is semantically fabulous but syntactically slightly
dubious. '~' reads 'match' in my book,
Really? We don't have any trouble in Perl 5 with an = character
being used in various unrelated operators:
== comparison
=assignment
~= match
In a message dated Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Damian Conway writes:
> One *might* argue that <~ ought to be of higher precedence than ~>
> (i.e. that invocants ought to be bound ahead of other arguments).
>
> If so, then:
>
>$foo ~> print <~ $*STDERR
>
> is really:
>
>$foo ~> print $*STDERR:
Damian Conway wrote:
> Really? We don't have any trouble in Perl 5 with an = character
> being used in various unrelated operators:
>
> == comparison
> =assignment
> ~= match
s/~=/=~/
> => comma
> <= less than or equal to
But these are all roughly related to the
Michael Lazzaro asked:
OK, next question. Is _THIS_ possible?
class FileBasedHash is Hash { ...stuff... };
my %data is FileBasedHash('/tmp/foo.txt');
Yes. Though we would need a syntax for specifying that string parameter for the
generic C class. And, of course, a mechanism for constru
Mr. Nobody wrote:
I don't like either of these operators. What's wrong with
>
> @out = sort map {...} grep {...} @a
>
> ?
For a start, if these functions were to become (only) methods in Perl 6,
it would have to be:
@out = sort map grep @a: {...} : {...} :;
And even if we do have
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:39:52 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 7:29 PM -0700 1/7/03, John Williams wrote:
> >Perhaps you could explain how the $0 object will work in your mind.
> >A5 assert that $0 is a object, and it behaves as an array and a hash,
> >depending on how you subscript it. Typeglobs are
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Peter Haworth wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:39:52 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > At 7:29 PM -0700 1/7/03, John Williams wrote:
> > >Perhaps you could explain how the $0 object will work in your mind.
> > >A5 assert that $0 is a object, and it behaves as an array and a hash,
>
On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 05:36 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
Chris Dutton wrote:
@ages[*] = $today - %date_of_birth{@names}.values[*]
Well done. Thanks for working that out, Chris. And, in the process,
confirming my sense that vector ops are a better solution here.
;-)
Glad I could cont
> my Set of Apple $a;
> my Basket of Fruit $b;
>
> and a generic assignment:
>
> $c = $a;
> $c = $b;
>
> Now we can fill in your list (which is somewhat expanded):
>
AssignmentOK?Because...
=======
>> I'm just suggesting the same for the ~ character:
>>
>> ~~ smart-match
>> ~concatenate
>> ~| stringy bitwise OR
>> ~> append args
>> <~ invocate
>
> This is where I get lost. I see 4 different concepts being overloaded
> onto '~'.
>
> In the first it indicates 'm
Damian Conway writes:
> Unary ~> would (by analogy to unary dot) append the current topic to the
> argument list of its operand.
>
> Thus, your examples become simply:
>
> given @list {
> ~> grep /bad!/ ~> @throw;
> ~> grep /good/ ~> @keep;
>
--- Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mr. Nobody wrote:
>
> > I don't like either of these operators. What's wrong with
> >
> > @out = sort map {...} grep {...} @a
> >
> > ?
>
> For a start, if these functions were to become (only) methods in Perl 6,
> it would have to be:
>
>
At 2:08 PM + 1/9/03, Peter Haworth wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2003 15:39:52 -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
At 7:29 PM -0700 1/7/03, John Williams wrote:
>Perhaps you could explain how the $0 object will work in your mind.
>A5 assert that $0 is a object, and it behaves as an array and a hash,
>depen
(/dks attempts to pour water.)
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > And even if we do have both functional and methodical versions, this:
> >
> > @out <~ sort <~ map {...} <~ grep {...} <~ @a;
> >
> > is still clearer in its intent than:
> >
> > @out = sort map {...} gre
Mr. Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > @a ~> grep {...} ~> map {...} ~> sort ~> @out;
>
> That's going to be just plain confusing. Arguments to functions are
supposed
> to be on the right. And what's up with using them for assignment? Th
On Thu, Jan 09, 2003 at 11:01:51AM -0700, Thom Boyer wrote:
> Mr. Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3) "Do you care about readability at all? It seems to me that ~> and <~
> have no use except making perl 6 uglier and more complicated than it already
> is."
>
> I think ~> and <~ look pretty nic
--- Thom Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mr. Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > --- Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > @a ~> grep {...} ~> map {...} ~> sort ~> @out;
> >
> > That's going to be just plain confusing. Arguments to functions are
> supposed
> > to be on the ri
--- "Mr. Nobody" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Thom Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mr. Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > --- Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > @a ~> grep {...} ~> map {...} ~> sort ~> @out;
> > >
> > > That's going to be just plain confusing.
Mr. Nobody:
# It's not letting you do anything that you couldn't do before
# with normal function calls and assignment.
We're writing a useful language, not a Turing machine.
# I see it as making a bad idea even worse. I've never liked
# having one thing doing multiple completely different and
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 05:59:14PM +0800, Damian Conway wrote:
> > my Array @array := SpecialArray.new;
> >
> > Should the value in @array act like an Array or a SpecialArray? Most
> > people would say SpecialArray, because a SpecialArray ISA Array.
>
> Weell...*I'd* say that @array shoul
Has there been any discussion of how to create code in Perl 6 that's there
under some conditions, but not there under others? I'm thinking of the
spiritual equivalent of #ifdef, only Perlish.
In Perl 5, there were many attempts to use such a feature for debugging and
assertions. What everyone wa
On Thursday, January 9, 2003, at 03:05 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
I don't know about *your* font, but in mine the ~> and <~ versions are
at least twice as readable as the |> and <| ones.
Just out of curiosity, how did you measure that? ;-)
David
--
David Wheeler
> Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 19:55:20 -0500
> From: John Siracusa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Has there been any discussion of how to create code in Perl 6 that's there
> under some conditions, but not there under others? I'm thinking of the
> spiritual equivalent of #ifdef, only Perlish.
>
> In Perl 5,
On 1/9/03 9:01 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Well, I just do:
>
> sub debug {
> print STDERR shift, "\n" if DEBUG;
> }
>
> And hopefully (I don't know P5 internals so well) that optimizes to a
> no-op so there's not even a function call there.
I don't know P5 internals so well either, but I'm guess
On 1/9/03 10:10 PM, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> I would assume it to be a compiler hint via subroutine attribute.
>
> sub debug ($msg) is off {
> print STDERR $msg;
> }
>
> some "this subroutine is a no-op if a flag is set" attribute.
Hm, not quite as convenient as setting a package globa
On Thursday 09 January 2003 01:01 pm, Thom Boyer wrote:
> If you read ~> and <~ as "stuff this thingy into that doohicky", assignment
> makes perfect sense. They are plumbing connectors: sometimes they connect
> the water softener to the water heater (one device to another), and
> sometimes they co
32 matches
Mail list logo
