Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There is no way to get an anonymous rw scalar, is there?
There's always the Perl 5 hack:
\do { my $x }
Although that's not truly anonymous, I suppose.
There's a less-well-known hack that *is* truly anonymous:
$ano
Luke wrote:
> Both transparent dereferencing (infinite $$foo) and
> opaque dereferencing (one-level $$foo) have their uses, but they are
> definitely distinct.
Well, they are more like variations on a theme.
> Instead of adding different syntax for each
> kind, I'll propose something differen
Luke wrote:
> Both transparent dereferencing (infinite $$foo) and
> opaque dereferencing (one-level $$foo) have their uses, but they are
> definitely distinct.
Well, they are more like variations on a theme.
> Instead of adding different syntax for each
> kind, I'll propose something different:
Luke wrote:
> Both transparent dereferencing (infinite $$foo) and
> opaque dereferencing (one-level $$foo) have their uses, but they are
> definitely distinct.
Well, they are more like variations on a theme.
> Instead of adding different syntax for each
> kind, I'll propose something different:
On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 12:58:01AM -0400, Jeff 'japhy' Pinyan wrote:
>[ set notation for character classes ]
>
> What say you?
Off the top of my head I think using & and | within character classes
will cause confusion.
/ (<~(X & Y) | Z> | ) & /
So much for the "visual pill" of
Also,
Juerd wrote:
> The only real problem with having only infix := for binding, is that you
> can't easily use an alias (aka transparent reference) in a list. You can
> have an array of aliases, but it's harder to have an array or hash in
> which one element is an alias. Binding can be done explicitly:
Thomas Sandlass skribis 2005-05-28 17:34 (+0200):
> >%hash = { key => undef, foo => 'bar' };
> >%hash := $variable;
> >%hash = 5; # $variable is now 5 too
> Sorry to interrupt, but wasn't {} not derefed when assigned
> to a % variable? Don't get me wrong, I like this meaning. And
> it
I'm having a hard time coming up eith examples where I need anything otehr than
union and difference for character classes. Most of the predefined character
classes are disjoint, so intersection is almost useless. So for now let's just
stick with + and - and simple sets with not parens, unless
(This thread is referencing http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=461105)
I'd like to start writing the Module::Build/ExtUtils::MakeMaker for
Pugs. One of the first things that was mentioned was that the syntax
for use needs to support specifying the exact version or range of
versions you want to have
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 22:59:25 +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what is the default invocant of methods?
>
> method blarb ($normal_param) {...}
> # Same as
> method blarb (Class | ::?CLASS $invocant: $normal_param) {...}
> # or
> method blarb (::?CLASS $invocant: $normal_para
We have a pretty complex declarative language for argument
processing in the parameter declaration:
types, subtypes, constraint blocks
context propagation
default values
slurpiness
arity as a number does not give enough reflection into these
properties.
Are signat
On 5/28/05, Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (This thread is referencing http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=461105)
>
> I'd like to start writing the Module::Build/ExtUtils::MakeMaker for
> Pugs. One of the first things that was mentioned was that the syntax
> for use needs to support specif
Rob Kinyon wrote:
On 5/28/05, Rob Kinyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(This thread is referencing http://www.perlmonks.org/?node_id=461105)
I'd like to start writing the Module::Build/ExtUtils::MakeMaker for
Pugs. One of the first things that was mentioned was that the syntax
for use needs to
13 matches
Mail list logo
