Moritz Lenz wrote:
> Tests 34 to 36 were a bit overcritical:
>
> (0|undef && say "not ok 34") || say "not ok 34";
> (0&undef && say "not ok 35") || say "not ok 35";
> (0^undef && say "not ok 36") || say "not ok 36";
>
> but are easily corrected. The rest seem fine to me.
Easier said than done.
Q
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 09:22:25PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:
: Moritz Lenz wrote:
: > Tests 34 to 36 were a bit overcritical:
: >
: > (0|undef && say "not ok 34") || say "not ok 34";
: > (0&undef && say "not ok 35") || say "not ok 35";
: > (0^undef && say "not ok 36") || say "not ok 36";
: >
: >
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 03:00:54PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> : Question to p6l: do && and || autothread? Or do they collapse the
> : junction prior to evaluation? (I hope the latter, since I think it's
> : more dwimmy).
> :
> : Also do prefix: and prefix: collapse the junction?
>
> I think it wo
Larry Wall wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 09:22:25PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> : Moritz Lenz wrote:
> : > Tests 34 to 36 were a bit overcritical:
> : >
> : > (0|undef && say "not ok 34") || say "not ok 34";
> : > (0&undef && say "not ok 35") || say "not ok 35";
> : > (0^undef && say "not ok 36
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 05:05:46PM -0500, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
: On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 03:00:54PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > : Question to p6l: do && and || autothread? Or do they collapse the
: > : junction prior to evaluation? (I hope the latter, since I think it's
: > : more dwimmy).
:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:15:05AM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> Larry Wall wrote:
> > I think it would be best if all boolean contexts collapse consistently,
> > and I would consider all of those to be boolean contexts. More
> > precisely, && and || are boolean on the left, but not on the right.
>
