On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:26:49PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Chip and I have been having a discussion. I want to write:
>
> sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { eval $^codestring } }
> say foo()("$x");
>
> I claim that that should print 1. Chip claims it should throw a warning
> about bec
On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 06:22:22PM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
> Well, you could always do something like:
>
>sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub {my $x := $OUTER::x; eval $^codestring} }
In perl5, that would just be
sub foo { my $x = 1; return sub { $x ; eval $_[0]} }
--
You live and learn (a
ain (and fragile). An empty list of
subscripts should return an empty slice.
What this mark is really trying to say is "The definition of the indices
is coming from elsewhere". I'm wondering if these semtantics would make
it appropriate to use the yada operator here:
@foo[...] <== @bar;
Dave.
a reason is a
separate question.) I understand it would be difficult, since properties
work off the 'is' keyword, which returns its left arg; still, I don't see
why this is harder (from a programming view) than making 'if' and 'unless'
capable of prefix or postfix usage.
Dave
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:30:07PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > - A while ago, someone suggested that the word 'has' be an alias
> > for 'is', so that when you roll your own properties, you could write
> &
this case, I really am setting a property, not setting a
property.
I'm not sure what the appropriate way to disambiguate the two is,
or if there even needs to be a specific mechanism (can perl be smart
enough to DWIM on this?). Definitely something to think about.
Dave
I recently received the following email from someone whose name I
have snipped.
> * Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/16/2001 08:11]:
> >
> > Ok, this is basically a bunch of "me too!"s.
>
> Keep the snide comments to yourself. Thanks.
ng here, but I get nervous about
"as" and "is" being the chosen keywords...they are only one letter apart
and the cognitive difference between them is very small(*); I think it
would be very easy to mix them up.
Dave
* For an example of words that are only one letter apart but have a very
large cognitive difference, try "now" and "not."
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>> > >my $a is true = 0; # variable property
>> > >my $a = 0 is true; # variable property
>> > >my ($a) = 0 is true;# value property
>> >
>> > Wow. Totally ETOOCONFUSING.
>
oofwoof
> 110 woofwoof
> 111 woof woof
Third, a question about the table above. (+spot).bark evaluates to the
value properties, yes? So, shouldn't the 'arf' and 'Error' be switched
for 010?
Dave
On Mon, 21 May 2001, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2001 at 10:01:28AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> Would you also advocate separate declarative syntax for variable
> properties and value properties? That's where I think much confusion
> will be.
till out
there),
- having an unmatched ' screws up most highlighting editors
- I personally think it is an unattractive syntax (MHO)
Dave
ow
warnings upon encountering a construct that would interfere with
compile-time checking? Make it be off by default, of course, but if
people want Perl to help them check this kind of thing, it should be
possible.
Dave
English lexicon? Completely redundant and drives me up the
> wall. Almost as bad as "ecommerce".
But if we did, how could we hope to get a good new Star Trek
series? :>
Dave
tiple relationship tests without needing all those
"&&"s and such. If we assume that these expressions read from left to
right by overlapped pairs, so that these are equivalent:
($foo < $bar < $baz < $jaz)
(($foo < $bar) && ($bar < $baz) && ($baz < $jaz))
...then I don't think we're giving up any comprehensibility, and
we are gaining conciseness. I vote 'yes' (fwiw).
Dave
oy! I told you to use K&R indentation
style and you deliberately disobeyed! Crawl and lick my keyboard!"
Dave
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Daniel S. Wilkerson wrote:
> For example, the
> "going back in time and preventing your grandparents from having sex"
> situation.
Bah, who needs sex these days? A little in vitro here, a little
cloning with genetic tweaking there...a whole new person, no sex inv
t; have to play with it a little. Fortunately, its a decision that can
> easily be reversed.
>
> You can always just do this:
>
> my Value $foo;
>
> And $foo will act like a normal scalar taking anything (your PMAW).
If that's the goal, I'd vote that it be spelled:
my Scalar $foo;
--Dave
ne will just point me to the appropriate part of the FM.
)
Second topic:
The debugger API PDD that I submitted a couple of days ago suggested that
we incorporate a profiler into the core. What do people think of this
idea?
Dave
happens with Java.
A good point. There should definitely be a clean API so that
other people can develop their own profilers which could then be plugged
in. This still leaves the question though...should core provide a default
profiler?
Dave
On Sat, 21 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2001 at 02:47:43PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> > It would be nice if there was a
> >
> > use strict 'recursive';
> >
> > option that you could set in a script or module (pa
On Sun, 22 Jul 2001, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I discovered today that I had forgotten to put 'use strict' at the top of
> > one of my modules...it was in the script that _used_ the module, but not
> > in the
.= 'a';
{
$b .= 'e', $b .= 'f', $b .= 'g' if my $b .= 'b', $b .= 'c', $b .= 'd';
print "b: $b\n";
}
print "b: $b\n";
"A if B" is syntactically equivalent to "(B) && (A)" (in
Sethi, Jeffrey D. Ullman (Contributor)
ISBN: 0201100886
You can get it from Fatbrain:
http://www1.fatbrain.com/asp/bookinfo/bookinfo.asp?theisbn=0201100886&vm=
Dave
On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Brent Dax wrote:
> I'm going on vacation soon, and I'd like to get a good book on writing
Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There are a number of properties "built into" Perl 6. Nearly all of these
>> properties don't make sense across the board - eg, a scalar won't have a
>> dimension, a hash won't prompt, etc.
>>
>> So given the two different sets that y
t;feature" could be added
to perl5 too.
Anyway, I've got to go now, those nice men in the white coats are bringing
me my medicine
Dave M.
Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > {
> > my $x = "bar";
> > sub foo {
> > # $x # <- uncommenting this line changes the outcome
> > return sub {$x};
> > }
> > }
> > print foo()->();
>
> Well, I would expect it to output 'foo' on both occasions, and I'm
> more than a l
But once you throw in BEGIN and eval, the distinction starts to blur.
Dave M
> I guess you missed where I suggested that putting "my" on that
> declaration is also counter-sensical, not to mention redundant.
> "my" implies a brand-spanking-new lexical variable attached
> to this very scope. The semantics of "outer" (or "closed"...)
> can be defined to imply a lexical var
that a named
sub would be:
BEGIN { * foo = sub { } }
and the problem comes back ;-)
Anyway, coming back to my original suggestion:
I think closures are a lot harder (or at least subtler) than people
think, and explicit declarations might help. There again, they might not.
Ah well
Dave M.
John Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dave Mitchell wrote:
> > I think closures are a lot harder (or at least subtler) than people
> > think,
>
> It's hard for me to agree with you, because I've never had *any*
> problems with closures. (And yes, I us
abbed, while the following line causes
foo()'s $x to be grabbed:
{ my $x = 'bar'; sub foo { sub {$x}; {$x} }}
Clearly one of them is a bug, but which one? No one on P5Pers seemed to want
to decide.
Use of an 'outer' declaration would make this explicit:
{ my $x = 'bar'; sub foo { outer $x; sub {$x} } # grab foo's $x
{ my $x = 'bar'; sub foo { {outer $x;} sub {$x} } # grab outer $x
Dave "monomania" M.
following 2 examples
output if Perl were doing the "right" thing?
sub pr { print $_[0] || 'undef', "\n" }
{ my $x = 'X'; sub f { $F = sub {pr $x} }}
f(); $F->();
{ my $y = 'Y'; sub g { pr $y; $G = sub {pr $y} }}
g(); $G->();
Dave.
e native numbers, does it support threads and (if so) what
threading model (though this is probably a moot point in P6, perhaps it
is something that could be included into 5.8.x).
Dave Storrs
d to some sub's %MY, at either compile or run time.
I'd be a lot happier about this concept if I knew how it was supposed
to behave!
Dave M.
Garrett Goebel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> From: Dave Mitchell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > sub Foo::import {
> > my %m = caller(1).{MY}; # or whatever
> > %m{'$x'} = 1;
> > }
...
> > sub f {
> > my $x = 9;
> >
can I just clarify something about delete:
my $x = 1;
{
my $x = 2;
delete $MY::{'$x'};
print $x;
$mysub = sub {$x};
}
print $mysub->();
People seem agreed that print $x should do the equivalent of
throw "lexical '$x' no longer in scope"
rather than printing 1, but what s
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> >my $x = 1;
> >{
> > my $x = 2;
> > delete $MY::{'$x'};
> > print $x;
> > $mysub = sub {$x};
> >}
> >
> >print $mysub->();
> >
> >People seem agreed that print $x should do the equivalent of
> > throw "lexical '$x' no longer in scope
=head1 TITLE
API for the Perl 6 debugger.
=head1 VERSION
1.1
=head2 CURRENT
Maintainer: David Storrs ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Class: Internals
PDD Number: ?
Version: 1
Status: Developing
Last Modified: August 18, 2001
PDD Format: 1
Language: English
=head2
One further worry of mine concerns the action of %MY:: on unintroduced
variables (especially the action of delete).
my $x = 100;
{
my $x = (%MY::{'$x'} = \200, $x+1);
print "inner=$x, ";
}
print "outer=$x";
I'm guessing this prints inner=201, outer=200
As for
my $x = 50;
{
my $x =
"Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 06:16 am, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> > One further worry of mine concerns the action of %MY:: on unintroduced
> > variables (especially the action of delete).
> >
> > my $x = 100
"Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> mused:
> Consider it like, oh, PATH and executables:
> `perl` will search PATH and execute the first perl found, but 'rm perl' will
> not. It would only remove a perl in my current scope..., er, directory.
But surely %MY:: allows you to access/manipulate v
Here's a list of what any Perl 6 implementation of lexicals must be able to
cope with (barring additions from future apocalyses). Can anyone think of
anything else?
>From Perl 5:
* multiple instances of the same variable name within different scopes
of the same sub
* The notion of intr
"Bryan C. Warnock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 06 September 2001 08:53 am, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> > But surely %MY:: allows you to access/manipulate variables that are in
> > scope, not just variables are defined in the current scope, ie
> >
>
Aaron Sherman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If it's an outer-scope lexical, use C{MY}>
>
> Ok, I'm all over the nice new features of Perl6, but darnit,
> "upvar" is one of the primary reasons that TCL is unusable. Please,
> let's not soften the walls of lexical scope. They're there for a
> reaso
tch(...) {
case 1: ...;
nobreak; /* intentional fall-through */
case 2: ...;
break;
case 3: ...;
}
Does anyone agree that `nobreak' reads much better than `skip'?
Dave.
> What I don't want to start (and I may have done so anyway) is a simple
> name war. If you feel emotionally attached to "Perl", then fine, so am
> I. But if you feel that there is some compelling logic here that will
> affect the community, I would be very interested.
The reason why it's still
only thing to the left of ->
is a scalar, it could reduce to this (in Perl5 terms):
# This Perl6:
for $_ -> $x { ... }
# is the same as this Perl5:
{
my $x = $_;
local ($_);
{ ... }
}
Dave Storrs
On Wed, 30 Jan 2002, Ted Ashton wrote:
> Thus it was written in the epistle of Dave Hartnoll,
> > > Oh, one other tweak. The RFC proposes to overload next
> > > to mean "fall through to the next case". I don't think [...]
> >
> > I would like to
1076 $self
181 $x
126 $file
110 $class
109 $name
98 $i
92 $line
82 $r
80 $s
75 $dir
74 $a
71 $fh
70 $key
69 $path
68 $p
68 $y
66 $c
66 $n
63 $text
60 $type
and in 48th place:
22 $this
Dave.
--
"Do not dabble in paradox, Edward, i
On Sat, Apr 13, 2002 at 05:07:37PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
> Of course, one of the big reasons we went with $self was the pun:
>
> my $self = shift;
>
> which we won't have now. Unless we always hide the invocant and
> force you to say
>
> my $self = invocant;
>
> or some such mummer
On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 06:17:24PM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> In Exegesis 4, Damian writes:
>
>
> It's important to note that writing:
>
>
> for @a; @b -> $x; $y {...}
> # in parallel, iterate @a one-at-a-time as $x, and @b one-at-a-time as
> $y
>
> is not the same as writing:
>
>
ould confuse people into thinking that they will need to
manually dereference the variable, which they shouldn't need to do.
Is there a way to do this now? If not, will there be a way in
Perl6?
Dave Storrs
[Several people said something like "$var is rw will do it")
Ah, that's right. I had forgotten about this.
Thanks to everyone who responded.
Dave
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 01:09:43PM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> Anyone know what the chances are that some enterprising C hacker
> can/will/did get the // and //= operator into Perl 5.8? Seems like it
> wouldn't be a huge deal to add, and I'd love to have it sooner rather than
> later.
I hope yo
On Wed, Apr 17, 2002 at 01:58:05PM -0700, David Wheeler wrote:
> On 4/17/02 1:51 PM, "Dave Mitchell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> claimed:
>
> > I hope you're referring to 5.8.x for some x != 0 ??? :-)
>
> Do you know how late in the development process the $code
In the true sprirt of perverseness, why not make loops into functions that
return the number of iterations taken. Then you can have
loop {
}
or die "loop not taken\n";
;-)
--
A walk of a thousand miles begins with a single step...
then continues for another 1,999,999
On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 02:33:42PM -0600, Jim Cromie wrote:
>
> with p5, Ive often written
>
> eval {} or carp "$@ blah";
You generally Don't Want To Do That.
If the eval succeeds, but the last statement in the eval happens to come
out as false, then it'll still carp:
$a = 0; eval { 1 < $a
to get P6 to execute P5 is a task
equivalent to reimplementing P5 from scratch. I'm wondering if instead,
we continue to maintain the P5 src tree, and embed P5 within P6 (embed in
the sense of Apache and Mod_perl). Sick and ugly, but maybe more practical
than the alternatives. It also means tha
a chicken and egg problem
> > there, I'm sure we can find a solution.) This leads me to...
>
Having it figure out the dependencies is definitely a major plus.
As to how to solve the chicken-and-egg...just provide a way to upload
multiple separate modules simultaneously.
Dave
Well, A5 definitely has my head spinning. The new features seem amazingly
powerful...it almost feels like we're going to have two equally powerful,
equally complex languages living side-by-side: one of them is called
"Perl" and the other one is called "Regexes". Although they may talk to
one an
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> > Somehow, this feels like we're trying to roll all of Prolog
> > into Perl,
>
> No. We're rolling in all of yacc/lex/RecDescent instead. ;-)
And this should reassure me _why_?
I assume that 'fatal.pm' is a new pragma.
1) What (if anything) does it do, aside from turning 'fail' into a fatal
exception when used outside a regex?
2) Do you need to use it before you can (usefully) use 'fail' INSIDE a
regex? (I would assume not, but though
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> >
> > I assume that 'fatal.pm' is a new pragma.
>
> Already exists for Perl 5, actually.
*blush* Must have missed it. Drat, and I just finished rereading
Camel III. Apologies.
Dave
On Fri, 7 Jun 2002, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > Dave Storrs wrote:
> > Can we please have a 'reverse x' modifier that means "treat whitespace as
> > literals"? Yes, we are living in a Unicode world now and your data could
> >
> > /FATAL ERROR\:
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 01:23:24PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> Hopefully the Cabal [2] can debunk that.
[snip]
> [2] Of which there is none.
and http://www.perlcabal.com/ doesn't exist, right? ;-)
--
"I do not resent critisism, even when, for the sake of emphasis,
it parts for the time w
t
the caller, ie
sub import {
caller(1).MY{'&foo'} = sub { ... };
}
(for some vague handwaving interpretation of caller() and MY)
Dave.
--
My get-up-and-go just got up and went.
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:41:20AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> The place where you'll run into problems in where you have multiple
> variables of the same name at the same level, which you can do in
> perl 5.
can it?
can you give an example?
--
In England there is a special word which means
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 11:57:02PM -0400, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to Dave Mitchell:
> > Based on what I rememeber from the long threads about this,
>
> Ouch. I gather, then, that nntp.perl.org does not house complete list
> archives, or else the discussion was
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 02:29:08PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> At 7:18 PM +0100 7/11/02, Dave Mitchell wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:41:20AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> >> The place where you'll run into problems in where you have multiple
> >> variab
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 10:37:27PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> Is there any specific case where you can't treat
>
> {
> my $foo = 12;
> print $foo;
> my $foo = "ho";
> print $foo;
> }
>
> as
>
> {
> my $foo = 12;
> print $foo;
> {
> my $foo = "ho";
> print $foo;
> }
>
tion could keep just stuff in parens:
>
>@tokens = split _/\s*([?=*-+])\s*/, $sql, keep=>'parens';
But perl5 already does this:
$ perl -le 'print join "|", split /\s*([?=*-+])\s*/, "rank = ?"'
rank|=||?
$
Dave.
--
You live and learn (although usually you just live).
On Thu, Aug 01, 2002 at 06:17:11PM -0400, Uri Guttman wrote:
> do these instead:
>
> $bool += 0 ;
> ($x == $y) + 0
or even
$x == $y || 0
--
Never do today what you can put off till tomorrow.
e. Why is
this replacement necessary...isn't it sufficient to simply define it as
whitespace, as was done above?
Dave Storrs
On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Ken Fox wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote:
> > why didn't you have to write:
> >
> >rule ugly_c_comment {
> >
> /
> >
> \/ \* [ .*? ? ]*? \* \/
> >
> { let $0 := " " }
>
Ah! Ok, yes, I had missed that. Thanks, this is exactly what I wanted.
Dave
On Mon, 5 Aug 2002, Stephen Rawls wrote:
> >> Doesn't the :w option do that?
> >> :w/one two/ translates to /one \s+ two/
>
> >Not exactly. The regex you showed would match any o
On Fri, Oct 25, 2002 at 11:27:54AM -0700, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> &&||!!//- boolean operations
> &&= ||= !!= //=
> and orxor
Hmmm, given Larry's comments just now about about similar things not
looking similar, I really think | vs ! is a mistake. Fr
On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 06:51:14AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> String complement treats the value as a string then bitwise complements every
> bit of each character.
Is that the complement of the codepoint or the individual bytes?
(I'm thinking utf8 here).
--
Nothing ventured, nothing lost.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 02:55:57PM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote:
>
> damian's syntax table and his use of the term vectorizing made me wonder
> why we call his [op] thing a hyperoperator? the word hyper i assume came
> from hyperdimensional. but calling [] the vectorizing (or just vectored)
> op varia
e of 8, but $a = $a + 3 leaves it with a
value of 9.
Dave Storrs
or hairy fishnuts" reference in
here somewhere, but I can't quite make it work.
Dave Storrs
In the "Re: Wh<[ie]>ther Infix Superposition ops" thread
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Piers Cawley wrote:
> But given a decent Collection hierarchy:
>
> my $seen = Set.new($start,$finish);
>
> for <> -> $next {
> print $next unless $next =~ $seen;
> $seen.insert($next);
> }
In a different thread, Buddha Buck wrote the following code snippet:
for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] };
And I finally had to whimper publicly about this.
I've been lurking around the P6 process since the very beginning of the
RFC process. I saw the new 'for' syntax come out, and
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Michael Lazzaro wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 30, 2002, at 12:48 PM, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > for @a; @b -> $x is rw; $y { $x = $y[5] };
>
> I agree that it's an eyeful. How many of your issues could be solved
> if the above were just wri
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
> --- Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > for @a -> $x<; @b -> $y { $x = $y[5] };
>
> Yes!!!
>
> (Except for the '<'. That's feigen-ugly.
*shrug* You may not like the aes
On Thu, 31 Oct 2002, Damian Conway wrote:
> Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> > Actually, yes, that would solve everything for me...and I knew
> > this was valid syntax.
>
> So is this vertical layout, which I think will become fairly standard
> amongst those who care about
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Angel Faus wrote:
> Then let's make the parens required when there is more than one
> stream.
>
> Sane people will put them there anyway, and it will force the rest of
> us to behave.
>
> It also solves the ";"-not-a-line-seperator problem.
>
> -angel
Yes! Thank y
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Graham Barr wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 01:57:00PM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
> > *shrug* You may not like the aesthetics, but my point still
> > stands: "is rw" is too long for something we're going to do fairly often.
>
> I am
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, Larry Wall wrote:
> If no one saw them then it could well be a problem on my end.
> I'm trying to use a mailer (pine) that doesn't know about UTF-8 in
>
> @a «+» @b
I'm using Pine 4.33 on FreeBSD 4.3, and I see these fine.
--Dks
with that approach is that the
multithreading would not be able to preempt C-level callouts: but that
could be solved by spawning a true thread only when code makes calls out
of the parrot VM.
Dave.
s have completed?
If both throw an exception: what happens then?
Dave.
require the brackets, or require backspace to be spelt differently.
>
> But I think we'd definitely like to introduce \d.
>
Our numeric literals use # for radix stuff. So perhaps we could use "\#..."
to introduce explicit codings:
"\#d13"
"\#h0d"
&quo
e operation. Can I say:
my (@a,@b) = divvy { ... } @a1;
(@a,@b) push= divvy { ... } @a2;
Dave.
"Miko O'Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> > Only if we apply a bit of magic (2 is a true value). The rule might be:
>
> How about if we just have two different methods: one for boolean and one
> f
; :: $v > 20 ?? "high" :: "mid";
};
Also, can I return superpositions (sorry, junctions), to provide
multiple classifications? Or would I return an array for that?
Dave.
d write:
@out = @in
pp map { foo }
pp grep { bar }
pp sort { $^a <=> $^b }
Dave.
On Sat, Dec 07, 2002 at 01:28:41PM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
> Dave Whipp wrote:
>
> > I notice everyone still want Int context for eval of the block:
> > Pease don't forget about hashes. Is there such a thing as
> > 'hashkey context'?
>
>
On Sun, Dec 08, 2002 at 09:35:16PM -0800, Dave Whipp wrote:
> is to use an alphabetic name (e.g. || vs or). perhaps the we
> could name this operator C: its vaguely remenicent of the
>
>@out = @in
>pp map { foo }
>pp grep { bar }
>pp sort { $^a
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 03:38:58PM -0800, Rich Morin wrote:
> On occasion, I have found it useful to cobble up a "little language"
> that allows me to generate a list of items, using a wild-card or some
> other syntax, as:
>
> foo[0-9][0-9] yields foo00, foo01, ...
>
> I'm wondering whether Pe
On Mon, Dec 09, 2002 at 03:58:54PM -0700, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > From: Dave Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > My understanding was that in Perl6, you could use pretty much anything
> > for a hashkey--string, number, object, whatever, and that it did not
> > get mashed d
301 - 400 of 496 matches
Mail list logo
