. Another view is that it's basically
turning a normal call into a mutator call of the splice variety.
So maybe map is just
sub map (&code, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) {
gather {
take @list.splice(&code);
}
}
or some such.
Larry
sh-speaking bias
that requires a "neither" on the front. So let's go ahead and make
it ??!!. (At least this week...)
Larry
of meta-model actions (Foo.meta.change_method(...) or somesuch)?
: What if I delete the symbol table entry, what happens then (more
: meta-trickery)?
No special {FOO} subscripts, so the question doesn't arise. To the
symbol table all blocks are stored as Foo<&bar>, presumably with
extra canonicalized key info for "long" names.
Larry
rse* as a list of lvalues. Maybe a siglet can degenerate to
that, but there are problems with that approach too. Unless someone
can come up with a better proposal, \($a,$b) is the default winner
on the basis of prior Perl 5 art.
Larry
On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 08:46:24AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: No special {FOO} subscripts, so the question doesn't arise. To the
: symbol table all blocks are stored as Foo<&bar>, presumably with
: extra canonicalized key info for "long" names.
Actually, we might
to the old .:baz() accessor),
and we presumably take steps to prevent people from breaking any "_"
encapsulation trivially. (The debugger needs to get at the info,
of course, which basically means anyone can if they pretend to be
the debugger, but we don't have to make it easy...)
Larry
y just MY::{$varname},
and also likely to be confused with ::($sym). So that approach doesn't
really buy us much.
So let's just try to make the simple Foo<$var> form stick for now,
and back off later if forced to.
Larry
this
and the previous approach is that you're not relying on the rules
engine to keep track of the queueing for you.)
The very fact that I had to use a phrase like "positive unindent token"
says a lot about why indentation as syntax is problematic in general.
Larry
27;m trying to get rid of.
Larry
if foo3
bar3
else
baz2
Larry
On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 07:57:43PM -0400, Collin Winter wrote:
: On 9/8/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > It seems to me you need a stack of levels so you know how many
: > indentation levels to pop off. Otherwise you can't parse this:
: >
: > if foo1
:
not require creating new containers --
:
: So comma in scalar context creates an array of aliases? That would be a
: welcome difference.
It might at that. Though doubtless there is a downside I'm not seeing yet...
Larry
;ve decoupled the stash from *being* the package object by making
it an attribute, why don't we say that any ._fnordish things just
get stuffed into a *different* stash attribute, and the ::{} can
simply return the public stash without having to do any filtering.
I think that's a lot cleaner.
Larry
On Fri, Sep 09, 2005 at 08:46:06AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: If these are really postfix operators, then we can also write
:
: Foo .::{}
: Foo .::<>
: Foo .::()
But I don't think they can really be postfix. At least, ::() isn't, since
$Foo .::($bar)
would no
= ($b,$a)
This is how Perl 5 assignment works, and we're trying not to break that...
Larry
rs:
:
: 1 < 2 < 3; # is really
: &infix:{"<"}(1, 2, 3);
:
: (This is, as far as I know, not specced. Take it as an report on Pugs's
Which is also, of course, what
[<] 1,2,3
turns into--unless it just turns directly into bool::true. :-)
Larry
=> 2, %defaults)
That's assuming it's not actually worth building the temp hash, and that
you want $a to end up 0 and ignore the 1.
Larry
orcing context also "item" and
: "slurpy", rather than "scalar" and "list"?
It's item and list, I think.
Larry
much as possible.
We need a consistent semantics more than we need to squeeze every
last ounce of optimization out of the resulting assembly code.
Specialized code can do specialized things with pragmas and types,
but by default we need to be general whenever we can get away with it.
Larry
that...
But yes, even with that desugaring, it does mean you're not writing
"pure" code in the functional sense.
Larry
g, but I strongly suspect that
most type-inferencing error messages will be complete gibberish
to commonfolk.
Larry
wn, I don't know.) But this gives us dynamic control over
warnings to complement (not replace) the lexical control provided by
"use warnings".
Larry
ault is to take the argument as rule,
and here we merely have a null "foo".
That gives us cool things like
s/back \s+ < \d+ > \s+ times/{ $<> + 1 }/
to increment the number of times the quick brown fox jumped over the
lazy dog's back.
Larry
tside the
scope, where the current scope could even be the current language
as a whole. That might alleviate cultural differences if one language
always uses $left and $right where another uses x and y, for instance.
Of course, I haven't eaten breakfast yet, so maybe that's impossible.
Larry
ng we abolish class methods entirely, only that
: we simplify them. If we do not require that class methods be
: inherited, then they can be implemented as ruby-style "singleton-
: methods" on the Class instance. This keeps the internals of the meta-
: model clean and orderly (always a good thing IMHO :).
:
: Anyway, I have said my peace, what do you all think?
I think there's no such thing as a Class instance. That simplifies
things even further.
Larry
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 09:43:15AM +1300, Sam Vilain wrote:
: Hi all,
:
: Is it intentional that S09 lists unboxed complex types, but equivalent
: Boxed types are missing from the "Types" section in S06?
Nope.
Larry
e easier to understand
with early binding rather than late binding. So another way to view
the role/class distinction is that roles have eager semantics while
classes have lazy semantics. I expect it's possible to do lazy
generics, but I would put it in the category of hard things that
should be possible.
Do I make myself perfectly muddy? :-)
Larry
gratuitous. Should work with parens too.
In fact, it should work with a bare range object on the left:
"foobar".trans( 'a' .. 'b' => '12'); # a=>1, b=>2
: Same problem ocurs if left hand side is a string and right hand side
: is an array reference but in this case the code implementing trans can
: see it.
Overzealous => stringification, I think. .trans can use a string as
a list by splitting it, but the underlying structures must be lists.
Thanks for working on this! Do you know any more people like you? :-)
Larry
ated objects, just as Routine (or whatever it is these
days) is a role that manages partially instantiated sub calls.
And they mostly manage by delegation to .meta.
Larry
(And for syntactic named args,
a => probably *should* be enforcing string context on the key.)
Larry
On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 01:27:58AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-14 10:43 (-0700):
: > Actually, it looks like the bug is probably that => is forcing
: > stringification on its left argument too agressively. It should only
: > do that for an identifier.
:
: Woul
generalization of
&func.assuming. That'd be kinda cool.
Larry
On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 07:39:36PM +0300, wolverian wrote:
: On Sat, Oct 15, 2005 at 08:25:15AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > [snip]
: >
: > Of course, there's never been any controversy here about what to call
: > "self", oh no... :-)
:
: IMHO just call it "self&q
Dog-0.0.2-cpan:LWALL
:
: And the user is now forced to add the cpan id to get Dog-1.2.1. I am
: not sure how strict @Larry wants this to be.
I think $Larry wants to be strict on this, at least this week. If you're
using two different versions explicitly within the same scope, you should
pr
weird things
with scope or duration.
* global scope
+ currently compiling scope
? currently compiled scope
= current file/pod scope
< current $/ scope
^ current signature scope
: make $:foo equivalent to :foo($foo) (conjectural)
Larry
which could be a
: very good thing, by the way) What replaces that?
The absence of a dot creates a private attribute. We decided it should
be even easier to declare a private attribute than a public one, so it's
just
has $foo;
and then it is visible only in the lexical scope.
Larry
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 12:59:34PM +0200, Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
: Larry Wall:
:
: > I think using two different versions from the same
: > module is going to be relatively rare.
:
: For dealing with two generations at the same time, like with
: conversions: in stead of designing and ap
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 09:33:39AM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: On Oct 19, 2005, at 4:10 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 07:38:19PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: >: Then this is added as "Dog-0.0.2-cpan:LWALL" into the main symbol
: >: table. Then once the com
aming authority" open, so that part is still subject
to extension, and that's one reason we put the naming authority at
the end. We could even add more hypthenated fields if they were
deemed to be of universal significance.
Larry
s. And in general people will want to declare these as
separate subs unless they have some particular reason for wanting to
force evaluation order, which is somewhat suspect in the first place
if you're using declared tree types.
Larry
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 03:10:13PM -0700, Nate Wiger wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >Well, we thought about opening it up like that, but we really kinda
: >need to establish what is an official part of the "long name" for
: >uniqueness purposes, and try to avoid too muc
class outside the methods, names
are not virtual.)
Larry
aram of .trans were called $foo.
: Would in the above case +($foo.key) == 2? And I guess the parens
: could be dropped because .key binds tighter than prefix:<+>, right?
: I mean the type of the key in the pair is an array of compile time
: strings. Or is that not preserved?
Yes, that should be preserved, seems to me.
Larry
he record, I still haven't
: figured out what I'm going to do yet. Check Perlmonks for the SOPW in
: a few minutes.)
We probably need some meta-information somewhere about which names claim
to offer the same interface, and which are just accidental collisions.
That part isn't terribly well defined yet.
Larry
On Wed, Oct 19, 2005 at 03:58:17PM -0700, Nate Wiger wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >This is one of those accomodations to the real world, like everyone
: >agreeing on a standard URI format. We're really trying to keep
: >these module names close to what you'd see as the n
easons". Instead,
the new sigil is the cent sign, so ::T is now written ¢T instead.
In addition, it doesn't automatically bind to T like we were making ::T
do, so you have to use it consistently:
sub sametype (¢T $x, ¢T $y) {...}
Within a larger scope, you can always alias, though:
::T := ¢T;
Larry
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:21:53AM -0500, Steve Peters wrote:
: On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 07:56:09AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: > I don't know how long this EuroOSCON net is going to stay up, so I'll be
: > brief. I think we're having a new "class" sigil. Where w
ppropriate ugly ASCII workaround for ¢ should be.
Larry
o say ¢T $x where it would be illegal
to say $T $x.
Larry
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:35:10PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: I'm sure ¢ will have its equivalent too.
c| or C| maybe.
Larry
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 08:45:25AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: More info. ¢T is a scalar variable just like $T, but enforces a
: class view, so you can use it as a class parameter, and pass any
: object to it, but only access the classish aspects of the object.
And a nice side effect of that is
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 11:46:30AM -0400, John Siracusa wrote:
: On 10/20/05 11:37 AM, Larry Wall wrote:
: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 10:32:14AM -0500, Steve Peters wrote:
: > : The idea of punishing programmers who choose to use certain operating
system
: > : or locales just doesn't
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 07:56:09AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: I don't know how long this EuroOSCON net is going to stay up, so I'll be
: brief. I think we're having a new "class" sigil. Where we've been
: writing ::T, that will revert to meaning "an existing c
On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:53:00PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-20 8:46 (-0700):
: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:35:10PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: > : I'm sure ¢ will have its equivalent too.
: > c| or C| maybe.
:
: But
:
: sub c { ... }
: sub d { ... }
:
lock, which
is why the second form above applies the existing T to $z rather
than capturing the type of $z. But it's a bit like writing &foo()
when you could just say foo() instead.
Larry
t.)
Anyway, I think people will be able to distinguish visually between
"A ¥ B" and "¥X" as long as we keep the operator/term distinction.
Larry
00, Rob Kinyon wrote:
: Isn't this starting to be the question of why we have the Unicode
: operators instead of just functions? Would it be possible to have a
: function be infix?
At which precedence level?
Larry
t;class" and "sub" are keywords in the, er, class of things
that trump mere symbol table entries. Either that, or "class" is merely
the name of the metaclass, and you'll get a class collision when
you try to redefine it. But I expect "class" is really a declarator
of the same status as "sub", at least syntactically.
Larry
it's right up there.
Larry
for (1..9) -> $n { # ought to be more than enough
COMPILING::{"\$_$n"} := COMPILING::("OUTER::" x $n)::<$_>;
}
}
maybe with something to catch the case of too many OUTERs.
Larry
x27;s not always obvious what's obvious.
Larry
ocant, and then the metaclass decides what to do
based on the instancehood of $x.
Larry
es only to throw them away immediately. And if we're going to
build surreal lists into the language, we should probably use them.
Larry
if it did work, it should be a placeholder variable,
not something you see in a signature.
Larry
same type as $x?
It's a new T according to the current thinking. Just use T if you
want the same one. (But that does force util to be recloned on every
entry to foo, I expect.)
Larry
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:44:35PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-25 14:35 (-0700):
: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 11:18:14AM -0600, Eric wrote:
: > : Actualy i think ^ might be my favorite so far.
: > : sub sametype (^T $x, ^T $y) {...}
: > I thought that, too, until I
low patterns that start with '='?
And basically I don't think people want to mutate $_ with math operators
all that often--and if they do want to, they probably don't. :-)
Larry
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 01:17:10AM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-25 15:51 (-0700):
: > ^T would still have to be a placeholder variable.
:
: Which it is, in a way.
Though we don't currently allow placeholders in ordinary sigs, or even
in conjunction with ordin
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 09:36:48AM +0200, Michele Dondi wrote:
: On Tue, 25 Oct 2005, Larry Wall wrote:
:
: >But we're trying to design the OO features (indeed, all of Perl 6)
: >such that you can usefully cargo cult those aspects that are of
: >immediate interest without being f
more tightly to the immediately
foregoing thing anyway. Like placeholder syntax, indirect object
syntax is really only for simple cases.
Er, looks like I have to revise S6 yet again...
Larry
Cat) and
.does(Fish) and
.does(Class) and ¢T := $dc.class and
.does(Scalar) and $dc := $_;
}
)
And basically, if | can be used to construct type sets, it ends up
meaning exactly the same thing:
:(Any|Dog|Cat|Fish ¢T $dc)
But maybe that just means we don't need it.
Larry
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 10:06:25AM -0400, Matt Fowles wrote:
: Larry~
:
: On 10/26/05, Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > So we'd get:
: >
: > :@array[42] 42 => @array[1]
:
: Do you mean C< :@array[42] 42 => @array[42] >?
Yes. I was changing it
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 04:02:06PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-26 6:44 (-0700):
: > I should point out that one of the major changes in the most recent
: > S6 is that named arguments are now marked by : rather than +, with
: > :foo($bar) being the way to declare
space
is required after the colon indicating a null invocant.
method doit (: $a, $b, $c)
But it's only slightly serious, considering that it has a smiley.
Larry
On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 05:17:40PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
: Larry,
:
: On Oct 25, 2005, at 4:37 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Mon, Oct 24, 2005 at 06:33:20AM -0700, Ashley Winters wrote:
: >: # behavior through prototype -- guessing realistic syntax
: >: Base.meta.add_method(
: >
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 04:59:04PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-26 7:31 (-0700):
: > One slightly serious ramification of the : switch is that the space
: > is required after the colon indicating a null invocant.
: > method doit (: $a, $b, $c)
:
: Or, we could se
nymous with
"class", Unfortunately "sort" is already hosed. Maybe "kind".
Then evolutionists could make jokes about the K(T) boundary, and
creationists could make jokes about "reproducing after their kind".
Some of us could make either kind of joke. But perhaps it wouldn't
be kind.
Larry
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 12:22:07PM -0400, Stevan Little wrote:
:
: On Oct 26, 2005, at 12:05 PM, Larry Wall wrote:
: >Of course, there are other words that are somewhat synonymous with
: >"class", Unfortunately "sort" is already hosed. Maybe "kind".
:
:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:06:15PM +0200, TSa wrote:
: HaloO,
:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 04:59:04PM +0200, Juerd wrote:
: >: Larry Wall skribis 2005-10-26 7:31 (-0700):
: >: > One slightly serious ramification of the : switch is that the space
: >: > is
, for instance.
: 3) Aren't classes mutable and roles immutable by default only? Or has
: this changed?
Of course. To change the default for a role, call it a class, and
to change the default for a class, call it a role. :-)
Larry
ility before you know whether it's going to affect
performance. Part of the power of Ruby on Rails reputedly comes from
the fact that Ruby leaves its classes open by default.
Larry
ean:
$x.kind :: $y.kind
Now all we need is infix:<:> to calculate the value of the relationship
of two items, and we can write:
$a : $b :: $c : $d
:-) * .5
Larry
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 06:34:48PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
: On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 04:56:23PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: : > Then ^T $x binds T to the kind of $x. And $x.kind == $y.kind asks
: : > if two objects are of the same type,
: :
: : Don't you mean $x.kind eqv $y.kind?
:
{
: > does Some::Class;
: > }
: >
: > Problem solved.
:
: Don't forget the fun of modifying all existing uses of Some::Class to
: use My::Version instead, if that's even possible.
That should mostly be handled by virtualized class names.
Larry
or, and the current scope has an A alias to
that long name, and that might collide with the A name of &A in
the current scope.
: Or, more explicitly (and more readably IMO):
:
: sub A (\$x) { A.new(*$x) }
Sorry, &A is introduced immediately, so you've just written a nice
infinite recursion. I'd suggest
sub A (\$x) { ::A.new(*$x) }
Larry
ow if it'll do what
you mean. If you're trying to establish a policy that defaults a
particular name to a particular version, the library interface will
probably give you a more straightforward way to set that up.
Larry
form $: this knowledge is *not* forwarded in the inheritance
: process. The non-twigiled forms of variables are lexically scoped without
: relation to the object state.
:
: Question: what is the current state of affairs in @Larry about the private
: instance data notation? Is it still with an under
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 08:14:11PM +0100, TSa wrote:
: HaloO,
:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Tue, Oct 25, 2005 at 10:25:48PM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: >: Yeah, I didn't really follow his argument on that one. I, too, think
: >: that the one() junction in general is silly, especi
On Sat, Nov 05, 2005 at 01:55:11AM +0100, TSa wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >The notion of constraints or limitations is already conveyed by
: >"where", and some subtypes may just be aliases.
:
: Wouldn't 'bound' work? Perhaps combined with 'on':
:
: b
tually looks like this?
my &meth(Method: $self: \$args)
I also wonder about hybrid hash/arrays:
my %harry(HashArray: Key^Int --> Any);
It would be nice to generalize this sufficiently to be able to declare
polymorphic objects resembling match objects:
my $matchobj(Poly: Key^Int^Notthere --> Any);
Or maybe that should be:
my $matchobj\(Highlander);
:-)
Larry
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 09:37:04AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: It would be nice to generalize this sufficiently to be able to declare
: polymorphic objects resembling match objects:
:
:my $matchobj(Poly: Key^Int^Notthere --> Any);
:
: Or maybe that should be:
:
:my $matchobj\(Highlan
ur pairs are containers, not values. Maybe \(key => $value) is
how you turn => into ::>, since in the case of an arglist you have
to be able to bind to the original $value.
Or maybe :> is our named arg syntax and => is always a pair.
Larry
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:53:26AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: Also, if we provide a way to return a pair instead of a value from a
: hash (currently done with the new :%hash syntax),
Whoops, I forgot I changed that to %hash: (and %hash:{'key'} too).
Larry
only strengthens my point: it's hard to do
: it right in Perl 5!
Okay, I won't shout (not even on PerlMonks :-), but named parameters
default to optional, so you'd have to write that as
sub convert (:$from!, :$to!, :$thing!) { ... }
in the current scheme of things.
Larry
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:20:39PM +0200, Ilmari Vacklin wrote:
: On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 12:05:30PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 11:53:26AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > : Also, if we provide a way to return a pair instead of a value from a
: > : hash (currently
On Mon, Nov 07, 2005 at 08:44:28PM +0100, TSa wrote:
: HaloO,
:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: > : ::Takes3Ints ::= :(Int,Int,Int --> Any);
: > :
: > : my &foo:(Takes3Ints);
: >
: > I'd say that has to be something like:
: >
: > my &foo:(T
w them
to be called with something resembling ordinary dispatch syntax
(probably via $!foo and $obj!foo() these days) but the public and
private dispatch mechanisms have no overlap.
Larry
being aware of it, as long as
we restrict the autodelay to apply only to things that can only return
boolean officially. We mustn't apply it to things that just happen to
be able to return boolean in boolean context, or things like
when %foo
can't work.
Larry
uke
:
: [1] I think I'm going to embark on writing down the laws for a few of
: our basic types so we can actually talk about this without speculating
: so greatly.
While you're there, also think about the gray area between arrays and hashes,
and whether .[...] subscripts are just a specialized form of .{...} subscripts.
Larry
dependent ones?
An array can have as many iterators as it likes, according to A6. There's
an underlying .specs objects that contains the specifications for how
to genererate "missing" values, and if the specs are smart enough, they
can be generated from either end.
Larry
901 - 1000 of 3168 matches
Mail list logo
