>
> So, it's because <> is so much bigger than «this», "this", or
> 'this'?
>
Would that have anything to do with "Big hat, no cattle"? :-)*
--
Email and shopping with the feelgood factor!
55% of income to good causes. http://www.ippimail.com
>
> A number of languages have a "with ..." construct that's intended to
> cut down on repetitive typing,
I hope I will be excused for dragging in the indecency, but it might be
worth looking at the concepts COBOL used to mitigate its verbosity, (e.g.
types defined in a structure that get inherit
"John M. Dlugosz" and I have both replied to "whiteringmoon"'s query, so I
don't think anyone else need to. (If he's genuine, we don't want to
bombard him with multiple replies, and if not, let's not give out too much
spambait.)
--
Email and shopping with the feelgood factor!
55% of income t
Just out of idle curiousity, (and so I can explain it when training), I
would like to know the original motivation for string/number arithmetic.
My guess is automatic generation of predictable filenames. Am I anywhere
close?
--
Email and shopping with the feelgood factor!
55% of income to
> On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 04:28:36PM -0500, John M. Dlugosz wrote:
>> Has the "err" operator, as a low-precidence version of //, been removed?
>
> Yes.
>
It could be recycled as a "fuzzy Boolean", returning a fractional value
between +1 and -1, indicating the confidence with which the result is
off
The Prelude could be helpful for training. I've been trying to work out a
logical path into Perl 6 for quite some time, not least because it's been
a moving target. If there's a set of definitions that a computer can
follow, humans should be able to move along that path too.
--
Email and sh
