Today I've started implementing typing relations for value types in
FP6. I intend to hold off subtyping until the simple types can be
checked and matched against smoothly. The types are currently:
VBool Boolean
VIntInteger
VNumNumber
VStrString
V
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 11:17:50AM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
> On 2005-02-03 at 11:13:30, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> >Today I've started implementing typing relations for value types in
> >FP6. ...
>
> Shouldn't this have gone to perl6-internals, not perl6-language?
Uh, as this is an ask
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 12:19:36AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> Uh, as this is an ask-for-clarification for a Synopsis, I think p6l
> is the correct forum. Of course, as I'm new to this list, I may be
> totally wrong, in which case please tell me so. :-)
To be more precise, according to S06:
On 2005-02-03 at 11:13:30, Autrijus Tang wrote:
>Today I've started implementing typing relations for value types in
>FP6. ...
Shouldn't this have gone to perl6-internals, not perl6-language?
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 11:17:50AM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
>
> On 2005-02-03 at 11:13:30, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> >Today I've started implementing typing relations for value types in
> >FP6. ...
>
> Shouldn't this have gone to perl6-internals, not perl6-language?
>
perl6-compiler@per
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 06:18:33PM +0100, St廧hane Payrard wrote:
> perl6-compiler@perl.org seems a good forum to me for your endeavor
> because you write a compiler for a subset of Perl6.
Okay. If that is the desired forum, tomorrow I'll switch my questions
to p6c and unsubscribe from p6l. Sorry
Autrijus~
Actually, I think that p6l is the correct place for this discussion.
My logic is that you are asking about specific facets of the language,
not helping the perl 6 compiler or parrot.
Matt
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 01:28:42 +0800, Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 03, 20
Stéphane Payrard skribis 2005-02-03 18:18 (+0100):
> perl6-compiler@perl.org seems a good forum to me for your endeavor
> because you write a compiler for a subset of Perl6.
What someone *does* is irrelevant. The topic of the mail message
matters, and if that is the language, this is the right lis
Sorry for the last thread. Please let it die off. Let me restart the
thread, asking the same question, hopefully making more sense this time.
I promise to write in concrete Perl6, instead of Compiler Speak. Really.
In Synopsis 6 version 6, "Value types" section:
my Dog $spot;
my $spo
On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 04:09:03AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
> Okay. So "Egg" is the value type for elements in @carton. But what
> is the implementation type of @carton?
>
> my @carton of Egg is Scalar;# is @carton Scalar?
> my @carton of Egg is Array; # is @carton Arr
My apologies if this has been asked and answered. I seem to recall it
being discussed, but for the life of me I can't find a clear reference
to it.
What is logic programming in Perl 6 expected to look like? Larry
writes that he wants "logic programming to be one of the paradigms that
Perl suppor
Autrijus Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, I'd still like to know whether my understanding on punning
> (same class 'Array' used as both Implementation Type and Value Type)
> and the validity of matching on "$var is TraitName" in subroutine
> signatures is correct. That, and types of hash
12 matches
Mail list logo
