On July 14th Yuval Kogman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 11:42:24 +0100, Smylers wrote:
>
> > I'm afraid I still don't get it.
> >
> > Or rather, while I can manage to read an explanation of what one of
> > these operators does and see how it applies to the variables in the
> > examples next t
Hello, everyone~
S04 doesn't explain the running order between the traits blocks FIRST,
ENTER, NEXT, LEAVE, and LAST. So I couldn't be sure whether or not my
tests in the Pugs test suit are correct. Please check out the
following test file, which also servers as the first sketch of my
proposal:
Hi, there~
While I was adding tests to t/syntax/comments.t in the Pugs test suit
this afternoon, I suddenly came up with this form of embedded
comments:
my $foo = #\ (this is a comment) 42;
is $foo, 42;
Now that we have the excellent unspace rule, why can't we use it
consistently with t
On 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
At 5:25 PM -0700 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
I'm wondering if it would not be inappropriate to change the name
Str to something more descriptive of its content within the
historical or current wider context.
... I have evolved my thoughts to accept that Str i
On 8/13/06, Smylers wrote:
Please could the proponets of the various behaviours being discussed
here share a few more concrete examples which start by explaning a
scenario in which there is a desire to do something, preferably one
that Perl 5 coders can identify with, and then show how on
Way back on 7/14/06, Larry Wall wrote:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 10:19:24PM -0600, David Green wrote:
[...]
No, === is also deep. It's only shallower (or potentially shallower)
in the sense that it treats any mutable object node as a leaf node
rather than changing to "snapshot" semantics like e
At 10:35 AM -0600 8/13/06, David Green wrote:
On 8/8/06, Darren Duncan wrote:
I thought your reasons made sense, and would be happy with a "Text"
type, although I don't especially object to "Str" -- as you say,
it's probably good enough given ordinary programming usage.
However the IRC ex
