single interpreter should be more than
sufficient.
-- Rod Adams
t I'd like to see some examples.
FWIW, I believe that Patrick's example of the PGE returning matches
could be written with given/take (if it was being written in P6).
-- Rod Adams
John Macdonald wrote:
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 03:02:41PM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
If there are good uses for coroutines that given/take does not address,
I'll gladly change my opinion. But I'd like to see some examples.
FWIW, I believe that Patrick's example of the PGE returning
ns justice. Looking ahead, I do not see this state changing for
the better in the foreseeable future.
It's my hope that someone none(@Larry) can and will pick this effort up.
I will give whatever assistance I can to anyone choosing to do so. Drop
me a line.
-- Rod Adams
at does nothing:
sub Foo { }
Is it illegal to say this?
sub Foo returns Void { }
Can't we just say :
Void =:= none(Any)
and get Void for near free?
-- Rod Adams
taken from what Larry was talking about when he first brought
up the [] metaop.
Unless, of course, there is some subtle difference between a 3-d hash
and a hash of hashes of hashes that invalidates this.
-- Rod Adams
er we have
to make != and !~ and ne transform themselves via "not raising", or
we have to disallow negative comparisons on junctions entirely.
Opinions?
I go with option 2b: leave the syntax the way it is, but fire off a
warning, not an error when someone does this.
-- Rod Adams
Larry Wall wrote:
On Sat, May 14, 2005 at 12:51:32PM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
: Unless, of course, there is some subtle difference between a 3-d hash
: and a hash of hashes of hashes that invalidates this.
No difference, I hope. The multidimensional notation is meant
to extend to HoH and AoA
e it's not
at all obvious that $x{2} is calling an array.
-- Rod Adams
eople on this list actually stand on the issue.
Here's the list as I've heard them:
$?SELF, and nothing else by default.
$_ bound to $?SELF at start of method.
o.
O.
this.
self.
me.
^
->
_
° (an idea I just had. would likely need a 7-bit option as well)
..
As for myself, I'm unfavorable to the first option, favorable to ->, °,
and me., neutral to the rest.
-- Rod Adams
Juerd wrote:
Rod Adams skribis 2005-05-14 19:21 (-0500):
o.
O.
this.
self.
me.
Not special syntax, meaning you can no longer use these identifiers for
your own class. Bad style to use single-letter identifiers, but we know
what trouble $a and $b in Perl 5 cause, and the B:: namespace.
I
easy
optimization of including unboxed equivalents and letting MMD sort it out.
-- Rod Adams
the CALLER is. Therefore, when log10() is called, the CALLER for
log() is the same as the CALLER for log10.
IMO, if this is not the case, it severely limits the utility of curried
functions. Comments from @Larry requested.
-- Rod Adams
My general thoughts has been that:
[op] @list
behaves something like:
eval join(op, @list)
so feeding it an empty list would return undef, regardless of op.
Similarly, if @list is just one element, it returns that element.
-- Rod Adams
hat way, doesn't mean it is that way.
But the "eval join" way of looking at it does seem to be consistent with
what I've seen discussed previously, and would provide a useful way to
remember the effects of edge cases.
-- Rod Adams
#x27;d have to stop and wonder if wrapping
it inside a map would be more natural. If it does happen, it'd likely
need to copy the key generation style of the new sort.
-- Rod Adams
g someone has to ask for, and that it
likely shouldn't carry the name 'uniq'.
-- Rod Adams
, assuming the module author was kind enough to up the
version number.
Glancing at S11, I see where you're coming from. There is some logic in
giving all the p5 modules an author of "perl5", since they will not have
one on their own. However, I think the calling syntax would have to be
"use Digest-(Any)-perl5;" to force the usage of a perl5 version.
-- Rod Adams
n an arrayref to an array element.
-- Rod Adams
Austin Hastings wrote:
--- Rod Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
You mean @a = [[1,2,3]]? Which is quite what you need for multi
dimensional arrays anyway @m = [[1,2],[3,4]] and here you use
of course @m[0][1] to pull out the 2. I'm not s
ize 3 in Perl6?
@a = 1,2,3;
You could, if you changed the precedence of , to be tighter than =.
However, by default, = has higher precedence than ,, so that you need
parens to override this decision: @a = (1,2,3);
Or use
@a <== 1,2,3;
-- Rod Adams
Markus Laire wrote:
Rod Adams wrote:
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
You mean @a = [[1,2,3]]? Which is quite what you need for multi
dimensional arrays anyway @m = [[1,2],[3,4]] and here you use
of course @m[0][1] to pull out the 2. I'm not sure if this
automatically
makes the array
r die.
In p5, your only options were to 1) not install the new version 2)
install it, and globally update your code to match, 3) give each script
it's own libpath.
I still think auto fallback makes sense. If you don't like it, always
fully specify your "use" statements. See S11 for details.
-- Rod Adams
Juerd wrote:
Rod Adams skribis 2005-05-26 4:15 (-0500):
From S02: "Array and hash variable names in scalar context
automatically produce references."
Since [...] produces a scalar arrayref, we end up with an arrayref one
both sides of the =.
No.
There is no scalar cont
wever, as I pointed out before, since in p5
there is no notion of an author URI, haveing that become the string
'perl5' makes sense, and could be matched against, both positively and
negatively.
-- Rod Adams
y be a split between bytecode/doc
distros, and full source distros.
I have no thoughts on how to handle the (un)installation of collections.
-- Rod Adams
Nathan Gray wrote:
possibly as an strftime() pattern.
Can we please make sure that strftime() is _not_ OS dependent like the
POSIX version is now?
-- Rod Adams
typed junction would look like : "Junction of Int|Str".
-- Rod Adams
to me that C should have an implied C on it's lhs.
Unless we spell that C.
-- Rod Adams
Sam Vilain wrote:
Rod Adams wrote:
How do I specify the signature of a context-sensitive function?
sub foo() returns (what?) {
return want ~~ Scalar ?? cheap_integer_result :: List_of_Sheep;
}
I suspect a typed junction would look like : "Junction of Int|Str".
, and dispatching accordingly.
3) a dispatch table of all the foo's currently in scope at the time the
reference is made.
Personally, I think #3 would be the most useful.
-- Rod Adams
eing moderately useful, I still find that only reliable way to
do automated multi-processing is to whip out Win32::Process and start a
new interpreter with special "I'm a child process" arguments.
-- Rod Adams
x" is spelled for certain. One could probably even
write a macro that auto-binds all the lexicals in the outer scope to the
current scope.
-- Rod Adams
Juerd wrote:
Still, argumentless split probably defaults to something. And ' ' is a
good thing to default to, IMO.
I like /\s+/ as a default for split better.
-- Rod Adams
1"}/;
s:g/multi (sub|method) / $1 /;
And then have a "single" still be multi, just with a MMD distance of
-Inf to everything.
-- Rod Adams
that counterintuitive. A more consistent
approach might produce
13
14
14
Don't you mean:
13
4
4
?
-- Rod Adams
o mentions that the 'goto' is implicit. I think I like the return
of a ref better, since you're not always going to want to build the
function out and store it. But the call can be hijacked, so I guess
that's okay.
-- Rod Adams
think. Also makes the info
available for more than just AUTO.* methods, which opens the door up for
all kinds of useful perversions, especially in the age of bindings and such.
I leave the definition of "something useful" to others.
-- Rod Adams
Larry Wall wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 07:09:42PM -0500, Rod Adams wrote:
: S10 talks about how it is AUTOSUB vs AUTOMETH (and others), but AUTOLOAD
: is still around. S10 doesn't mention it, but I think it's been said that
: AUTOLOAD only gets called as a last resort.
Really
201 - 239 of 239 matches
Mail list logo
