On Nov 12, 2:21 pm, stefa...@cox.net (Stefan O'Rear) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 05:47:46PM -0800, Ben Goldberg wrote:
> > I would like to know, is perl6 going to have something like select
> > (with arguments created by fileno/vec), or something like IO::Select
> > (with which the user doesn'
Hi,
Per S09, we can write in Perl 6:
my int @x;
And the idea is that we get a packed array - conceptually, a single lump
of memory allocated and and storing a bunch of ints contiguously.
Contrast this to:
my Int @x;
Where we get an array of scalar containers, each of which is only
allowed
Jonathan (>):
> Per S09, we can write in Perl 6:
>
> my int @x;
>
> And the idea is that we get a packed array - conceptually, a single lump of
> memory allocated and and storing a bunch of ints contiguously. Contrast this
> to:
>
> my Int @x;
>
> Where we get an array of scalar containers, each of
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 06:09:00PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
...
> With packed arrays, however, I'm less clear what they mean. Since
> the point of a packed array is compact storage, there's no chance to
> actually have containers. Thus does assignment to a slot in a
> compact array ever m
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 06:59:59PM -0800, Ben Goldberg wrote:
(snip plea to paint the bikeshed fuchsia)
The design of the I/O system will be chosen by the first person to implement
it. If you want any say in the matter, you need to be that person. Bonus
points if you also port at least one app t
On 11/13/2010 06:09 PM, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> With packed arrays, however, I'm less clear what they mean. Since the
> point of a packed array is compact storage, there's no chance to
> actually have containers. Thus does assignment to a slot in a compact
> array ever make sense? There's
Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> In the latter case, it's fairly clear how these differ:
>
> @x[0] = 1;
> @x[0] := 1;
>
> In the first, we look up the container in slot 0 or the array and assign a 1
> into it. In the second, we bind a 1 directly into the slot. There's no
> container any more (so any f
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11/7/10 23:19 , Jon Lang wrote:
> 1 -- 2 -- 3
>
> Would be a Bag containing three elements: 1, 2, and 3.
>
> Personally, I wouldn't put a high priority on this; for my purposes,
>
>Bag(1, 2, 3)
>
> works just fine.
Hm. Bag as [! 1, 2, 3
Brandon S Allbery KF8NH wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 11/7/10 23:19 , Jon Lang wrote:
>> 1 -- 2 -- 3
>>
>> Would be a Bag containing three elements: 1, 2, and 3.
>>
>> Personally, I wouldn't put a high priority on this; for my purposes,
>>
>> Bag(1, 2, 3)
>>
Jonathan Lang (>):
> As well, my first impression upon seeing [! ... !] was to think
> "you're negating everything inside?" That said, I could get behind
> doubled brackets:
>
> [[1, 2, 3]] # same as Bag(1, 2, 3)
> {{1, 2, 3}} # same as Set(1, 2, 3)
>
> AFAIK, this would cause no conflicts w
Carl Mäsak wrote:
> Jonathan Lang (>):
>> That saves a singlr character over Bag( ... ) and Set( ... ),
>> respectively (or three characters, if you find decent unicode bracket
>> choices). It still wouldn't be a big enough deal to me to bother with
>> it.
>
> +1. Let's leave it at that.
That sai
Jon Lang wrote:
That saves a singlr character over Bag( ... ) and Set( ... ),
respectively (or three characters, if you find decent unicode bracket
choices). It still wouldn't be a big enough deal to me to bother with
it.
As well, my first impression upon seeing [! ... !] was to think
"you're n
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:12 AM, Jon Lang wrote:
> Carl Mäsak wrote:
> > Jonathan Lang (>):
> >> That saves a singlr character over Bag( ... ) and Set( ... ),
> >> respectively (or three characters, if you find decent unicode bracket
> >> choices). It still wouldn't be a big enough deal to me t
I understand everything you've written except the following:
On Nov 13, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Hi,
> ...
>
> my Int @x;
>
> Where we get an array of scalar containers, each of which is only allowed to
> contain an Int (strictly, something that Int.ACCEPTS(...) hands
Darren Duncan wrote:
> Jon Lang wrote:
>>
>> That saves a singlr character over Bag( ... ) and Set( ... ),
>> respectively (or three characters, if you find decent unicode bracket
>> choices). It still wouldn't be a big enough deal to me to bother with
>> it.
>>
>> As well, my first impression upo
15 matches
Mail list logo
