Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread David Vergin
> On 9/18/07, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> For the Gearheads >> We won't bore you with excess details, >> but for more info... c.f. ... >> on 9/19/2007 10:19 AM Adriano Ferreira said the following: > I am thinking about such hooks and good ways to do that. As an eager r

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread Adriano Ferreira
On 9/19/07, Moritz Lenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adriano Ferreira wrote: > > http://ferreira.nfshost.com/perl6/stitching6.html > > A grammatical nit: "The infix operator '~' keeps the same precedence of > '+' in Perl 6." > I think that should be "the same precedence _as_" (but I'm not a native

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread Adriano Ferreira
On 9/18/07, Joe Gottman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adriano Ferreira wrote: > > I salute every bit of help. I am trying to organize the production and > > will hopefully provide more details soon. By now, I think that I can > > handle suggestions and corrections to the articles. The next one is >

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread Adriano Ferreira
On 9/18/07, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Looks good . . . but how short do we want them? Very short. The usual length that an IT-savvy guy (with at least some curiosity on programming languages) reads in a glimpse instead of going somewhere else looking for shorter or more immediate

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread Adriano Ferreira
On 9/18/07, David Vergin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 9/18/07, Paul Hodges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> For the Gearheads > >> We won't bore you with excess details, > >> but for more info... c.f. ... > >> > > on 9/19/2007 10:19 AM Adriano Ferreira said the following: >

Re: Micro-articles on Perl 6 Operators

2007-09-19 Thread Paul Hodges
--- Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 07:41:54PM -0700, Paul Hodges wrote: > : while length($ruler) < $len; # till there's enough > > There is no length function anymore. duh. I knew that. Still thinking in v5. Thanks, Larry.