view release on metacpan or  search on metacpan

t/lib/Hailo/Test/TimToady.trn  view on Meta::CPAN

we want to move away from being a Vulnerability as Weakness culture into more of a Vulnerability as Strength culture.
but that's what everyone else is doing. :)
simple is okay; we don't need flashy
anyway, we want to communicate simplicity
there's already far too much slick in the world
we'll do okay :)
nah, the ghost of Tolkien claims that large sequels only take 14 years
though the ghost of Moses keeps saying "I thought you said 40 years"
well, Perl 6 will be 16 in 2016, which is the usual age for a coming-out party...
though perhaps we could schedule a bat mitzvah in 2012
well, just mark it all as "post 6.0"
er, S11, actually
fired off those old octal neurons, did it? :)
other way around
the night is yet young
some people are easily amused
we can give you some great deals on S09!
only if you do it with the credit card we give you
(my %) % %3 probably
er
my *is* a declarator...
oh, it's the second one
er, third?
depending on how you count
presumably something like %($3)
well, STD doesn't actually care
it just assumes \d+ is a legal name to go after a sigil
well, it gives you a parse tree, but those don't ircify very well
you can get the parse tree if you run STD yerself
interesting, it returns the 3 as 'index'
yes, but you declared it as anonymous, so you have to declare it again
std: my & & my &
fnerk
wow, a real STD buglette
so are taps, at the end of the day
std: my ($)
std: my ( $ where $ )
that message could be improved
actually, it couldn't find an existent sub
or it found a non-existent sub
but I'd settle for a simple "Couldn't find &split"
std: $
std: my (IS $)
std: my ($ where $)
std: my & && my &
it's possible that Inf should not be in any of Int/Num/Rat, but be a subtype of Numeric
it's currently Num for historical reasons having to do with IEEE floaters
but p6 is supposed to extend the idea of Inf to all numeric types (that aren't native)
mostly, we need to put it where it can be dispatched sanely without having a lot of strange 'if' statements here and there
but there's an argument that any values are allomorphic
42 is an integer, a real, a rational, etc.
don't want slick, I want cute :P
we can also dispatch on specific values
otoh, values are consider an extra constraint, so doesn't dispatch only on the nominal type
(whatever that type is)
just thinking maybe the nominal type of a constant might be possibly be a role like Numeric without committing to a storage type, as long as all such values are distinguishable without consulting the storage type
a variable must have a storage type
but these are constants
I don't have any fixed ideas on this, but it seems like something worth considering
is Inf-time sometime?
as for the bucket, NaNtucket.
the lunch bucket, that is
of course, if IEEE floaters do the right thing with these NaNnies, then maybe we can just go ahead and use Num for mixed-mode operations when it's needed
and then we dont have to write anything special for 'em
yes, Rats
ng: say (1/3).perl
ng: say 9 * 1/9
ng: say "yes" if 1/3 * 3 == 1
don't try that one in Perl 5
bet it doesn't work for other fractions
we don't have an IrRat type
powers of 2 should always work
maybe someone installed a fuzz onto == comparisons since I last looked
maybe they got tired of that FAQ :)
my brane is in sideways today due to a sinus infection, but it seems to me that a reducecheck is conservative, and can be generalized later if desired
It's not clear to me that 'my' returns a signature
though you still have :() =
returns Parcel, I think
I'm not sure we have to support assignment to any possible signature
I don't see why we have to support list assignment to a fancy signature
list assignment shouldn't have to worry about named parameters *at all*
yes
yes
reducecheck sez "Too fancy to assign to"
binding should work consistently, modulo rw concerns
same as parameter binding
as in, "oops, I got a Parcel, need a Capture, so .Capture it"
how the heck to you assign to a signature object?
*do you
if $sig = ... it replaces the sig
I suspect we can just outlaw that for now
we can do anything conservative we like, as long as it doesn't admit possiblities that will have to be outlawed later
pmichaud: I think that's different
sure, but it's probably declaring a $a and $b inside the sig and then throwning them away
I think that's even specced somewhere
it's the declarator that says *where* you're installing the new symbols
no declarator, no install
but sigs declare new variables, not referring to externals
so it all follows
probably the only weird thing left is actually ($a,$b) := ($b,$a) # no : on front
it's liek we need a way to promote a list of lvalues to a sig
*like
probably can be done at compile time
but it's also got to defeat the declaring of a new $a and $b
I think so
$foo := ($b,$a) is always going to clobber $foo itself, regardless of what's in $foo
well, it would be good to know at compile time that you can't say ($a,1,$b) := ($b,$a)
certainly Perl 5 takes the lvalue checks rather seriously
and knowing something's an lvalue has got to be good info for an optimizer
it promotes to something else then
an "lvalue parcel"
supersede ($a, $b) := ... should make for an explicit override of an existing declaration, maybe
std: supersede ($a, $b) := ...
arguably, that should complain that $a and $b are missing
std: supersede Foo
std: supersede $foo
hmm
well, maybe not supersede, we're mixing up composition-time declarations with other stuff
phenny: tell masak Note that TTAGGG is not generally rendered into amino acids, but "TTAGGG" x $n is the definition of a telomere.
well, vertebrates, anyway, plus some fungussesses
I don't think Parcel should promote to Capture in a scalar
it should promote when it's used as a parameter list in a binding
er, argument list