On behalf of the Parrot team I'm proud to announce another
major release of Parrot. More than 530 svn checkins and 1000
added tests by numerous folks bump up the version to 0.4.0.
I'd like to thank all involved people as well as our
sponsors for supporting us.
What is Parrot?
Parrot is a virtual
what is a good translation of the following C into perl6?
#include
void print(int y[])
{
int ii;
for (ii = 0; 9 > ii; ++ii)
{
printf("%d ", y[ii]);
}
printf("\n");
}
int main()
{
int x = 0; int y[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}; y[x++]++; /* line
that matters */
p
Mike Li skribis 2005-12-04 13:10 (-0500):
> in perl5, i would've written something like:
> my $x = 0; my @y = 1..9; @y[$x++]++; print "$x\n"; print "@y\n"
> but in perl6, the '@' sigil always means list context, so should i
> write the following?
> my $x = 0; my @y = 1..9; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 2005-12-04 at 13:10 -0500, Mike Li wrote:
> what is a good translation of the following C into perl6?
>
[...]
>int x = 0; int y[] = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9}; y[x++]++; /* line
> that matters */
[...]
>
>
> in perl5, i would've written something like:
>
> my $x = 0; my @y = 1..9
There's a bikeshedding question of some visibility: now that we have a
C builtin, what do we do with C?
There's plenty of code out there that uses fail as an exported function
from pugs' Test.pm or Perl 5 testing modules. We want to keep Test
primitives exported and fun to use, to encourage people
I've run into a problem today with my Perl 6 coding, which is due to
a perceived design flaw in the current Perl 6 spec (this was
discussed on #perl6 just now, mainly between myself and autrijus), so
I'm bringing it up here.
And yes, autrijus thinks the behaviour I'm seeing in Pugs is
accordi
On 12/5/05, Gaal Yahas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's a bikeshedding question of some visibility: now that we have a
> C builtin, what do we do with C?
Is it possible to do nothing with it? That is, can we coerce the Test
module to understand when the main program "fail"s? This may be
prob
