David Christensen wrote:
I definitely like the hyper stuff how it is; maybe the answer is to
just define an infix:<[[]]> operator which returns the crosswise slice
of a nested list of lists. In any case it could be shunted aside to
some package and certainly does not need to be in core.
Didn't
Roger Hale wrote:
One set of cases that doesn't seem to have come up in discussion:
(1, 3, 2) >>-<< (83, 84, 81, 80, 85)
Should this give
(-82, -81, -79, -80, -85)
From an arithmetic point of view it should be exactly that. The
implementation might need to morph the code though, see below.
On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 12:10:48PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> I think I have to clarify what I mean by that last phrase. Trailing
> delimiters are hidden inside any token that has already been started,
> but not at the start of a token (where token is taken to be fairly
> restrictive). Therefore
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 01:31:12AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: On Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 12:10:48PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > I think I have to clarify what I mean by that last phrase. Trailing
: > delimiters are hidden inside any token that has already been started,
: > but not at the start of
Two things popped up while implementing a demo version of alarm() today.
1. In perl5 and in most underlying libraries, alarm() has 1 second
granularity (and a possible 1 second error on top of that). Can we have
the alarm builtin not assume the worst, and take a Num instead of an
Int, so that on s
> : But when you start interpolating, you get into a big mess:
> : h<\qq[$interpolated]> = want(); # ???
> : h<<$foo>> = want(); # ???
>
> I think that, as with functions called in unknown context, we should
> just force the RHS here to list context, and rely on the RHS to add
> extra context as
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 11:23:34PM +0300, Roie Marianer wrote:
: > : But when you start interpolating, you get into a big mess:
: > : h<\qq[$interpolated]> = want(); # ???
: > : h<<$foo>> = want(); # ???
: >
: > I think that, as with functions called in unknown context, we should
: > just force t
LW = Larry Wall
AT = Autrijus Tang
LW> I think I have to clarify what I mean by that last phrase. Trailing
LW> delimiters are hidden inside any token that has already been started,
LW> but not at the start of a token (where token is taken to be fairly
LW> restrictive).
AT> Consider this:
AT>
AT>
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 11:23:34PM +0300, Roie Marianer wrote:
> That makes sense, but that would make
> %num_of_lines = @file
> not DWIM... of course that would translate into
> %num_of_lines = scalar @file
> so maybe that's OK.
In order to promote proper syntactical thinking, note that this is
I'm looking in S09, and reading about junctions. It seems to me that
if we have a junction $j which we use to index into an array or a hash,
it should DWIM and return a junction of the corresponding values.
@ar=[1..10];
%hash=(a=>1,b=>4,c=>7);
$j=1|2|3;
$k="a"|"c";
$u = @ar[$j]; # 2|3|4
$
David Christensen writes:
> I'm looking in S09, and reading about junctions. It seems to me that
> if we have a junction $j which we use to index into an array or a hash,
> it should DWIM and return a junction of the corresponding values.
>
> @ar=[1..10];
> %hash=(a=>1,b=>4,c=>7);
>
> $j=1|2|3
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 06:44:55PM -0400, Kurt Hutchinson wrote:
: On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 11:23:34PM +0300, Roie Marianer wrote:
: > That makes sense, but that would make
: > %num_of_lines = @file
: > not DWIM... of course that would translate into
: > %num_of_lines = scalar @file
: > so maybe t
Hypothetical here:
If we want to calculate a set of values for a junction which map nicely
to a range with a few outliers, would it be possibly to have a
qualifier :except which allows us to make exceptions to our given
range? I.e.,
(Ignore for the moment the inefficiency of the choice of this
David Christensen writes:
> Hypothetical here:
>
> If we want to calculate a set of values for a junction which map nicely
> to a range with a few outliers, would it be possibly to have a
> qualifier :except which allows us to make exceptions to our given
> range? I.e.,
>
> (Ignore for the mo
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:02:45AM +0300, Roie Marianer wrote:
: But rx:P5// should act like qr//, shouldn't it?
Yes.
: LW> I suspect we can check after the $ for ), ], |, #, whitespace, or the
: LW> terminator, which rules out direct use of $/ inside /.../.
: I'll add a flag for that in rx:P5. I
The following is legal perl:
print "$a $b $c" if ($a,$b,$c)=(1,2,3);
This prints "1 2 3", but the definitions obviously aren't scoped to the
modified statement. And a C in the modifier is a bit too late.
Any reason to [not] add a C statement modifier which restricts
the scope of the declaratio
--- David Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking in S09, and reading about junctions. It seems to me
> that if we have a junction $j which we use to index into an array
> or a hash, it should DWIM and return a junction of the corresponding
> values.
>
> @ar=[1..10];
> %hash=(a=>1,b
Paul Hodges writes:
> Maybe, but I don't like returning junctures in those cases unless you
> *explicitly* ask for it. I'd rather the default be the arbitrary lists
> returned, or whatever fits the context. How about
>
> @ar=[a..z];
> %hash=(a=>1,b=>4,c=>7);
>
> $j=1|2|3;
@j = (1,2,3);
>
Paul Hodges wrote:
--- David Christensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm looking in S09, and reading about junctions. It seems to me
that if we have a junction $j which we use to index into an array
or a hash, it should DWIM and return a junction of the corresponding
values.
@ar=[1..10];
%hash=(
19 matches
Mail list logo
