pugscode.org | sial.org/pbot/perl6 | ?eval [~] <m oo se> | We do Haskell, too | > reverse (show (scanl (*) 1 [1..] !! 4))
Set by gaal on 21 March 2007.
stevan_ it wont let it happen 00:00
Limbic_Region or how to ensure that the object initializer gets called for all your ancestors
or ...
stevan_ Moose handles that too :)
Limbic_Region right - Moose has almost everything I want
stevan_ :)
Limbic_Region though I have to say - my non-Moose solution works pretty slick
but that's because I know how it is all implemented
*shrug* - if they can't figure it out, I will recommend hiring a perl developer (to my knowledge, there isn't a single one on staff) 00:01
contractor or otherwise
stevan_ - AFAICT, those two things are all I can see missing from Moose 00:02
stevan_ param validation and?
Limbic_Region abstract class/methods 00:03
stevan_ roles are those
just different terminology and style
cause roles cannot be instantiated
Limbic_Region yeah, so perhaps a doc update rather than a real change
00:04 offby1` is now known as offby1
stevan_ well roles are a different way of thinking too 00:04
Java guys can think of them as interfaces
Limbic_Region perhaps a "So you were a Java developer...."
stevan_ interfaces with code re-use :)
Java guys will get it 00:05
find the one Java guy in your shop who has played with Ruby
Limbic_Region I like the idea of writing nice clean respectable perl 5 code and not having anyone else be able to maintain it
stevan_ :) 00:06
Limbic_Region resulting in getting a full time perl developer on staff
stevan_ job security
Limbic_Region no - as I said, I'm not a developer
stevan_ ah
Limbic_Region this is one of the handful of projects I have been asked to write code for
stevan_ well, I think Moose + a subset of CPAN would probably work out fine for you 00:07
Moose plays pretty well with most modules
Limbic_Region ok ok - to be honsest, I don't feel like re-writing it
stevan_ LOL
transitioning to Moose is actually easy too
I have done it with our old app
its not an all or nothing framework
in fact,.. in most cases... Mooseifying takes much less time then people tend to think 00:08
at least this is the collective experience of the #moose folks
Limbic_Region well, I have already comitted to using a better framework for any future projects 00:09
stevan_ but thats okay,.. dont wanna use my module.. *sniff* ... I wont get upset ... *sniff*
Limbic_Region Moose is the current frontrunner
I have decided never to use plain p5 OO ever again - this project was the straw that broke the camel's back 00:11
stevan_ :D
I know that feeling
Perl 6 OO ruined me for Perl 5 OO
hence Moose
Limbic_Region yeah
stevan_ well, if you want to try a quick moosification of a few classes, I would be happy to help out and help smooth the transition 00:12
Limbic_Region well, I am considering working on it this weekend
I have a circular dependency issue I kind of want to think of a better solution for 00:13
stevan_ Moose attributes support weak-refs out of the box ;) 00:14
Limbic_Region oh, not a ref counting issue
I have a half a dozen or so Common::Base modules that can be used by any new class that provide extremely common functionality
stevan_ is starting to feel like a used car salesman :)
Limbic_Region one of them is a Common::Base::Log class 00:15
stevan_ ohh,.. i smell Roles ;)
Limbic_Region the other is Common::Base::FileSystem::Utils or some such
stevan_ remember,.. roles are not part of the class strucutre,.. so they eliminate entire classes of inheritence issues sometimes
Limbic_Region ::Log is obvious - log4perl rip off 00:16
FS::Utils does things like chdir, pwd, open file, remove file, blah blah
so here is the issue
FS::Utils assumes a log method in case something fails 00:17
but ::Log uses FS::Utils to open the log to write to
the way I solved it isn't quite optimal
how would you do that with Moose
stevan_ ah,... 00:22
sorry for the delay,.. small child issues :) 00:23
Limbic_Region I will tell you the two ways I solved it after
no worries - I understand
my family is out of the country ATM
stevan_ FS::Utils would require a log method
and log would use FS::Utils 00:24
then FS::Utils could accept any log method
Limbic_Region so you would make FS::Utils a non-OO class?
stevan_ yes
a role
Limbic_Region ok
stevan_ although I am not 100% sure of that relationshop working
I would have to test it out
Limbic_Region well, that's sorta one of the two solutions I did 00:25
stevan_ but since FS::utils would require a log method,.. and Log would provide it
it shoudl work
although delegation would work in this case too
I have to go deal with more child issues,... but I will backlog ... 00:26
00:26 rdice joined
Limbic_Region solution 1 - remove the log method from FS::Utils and have it return an obj/hash with things like success/failure, error message, etc and let logging happen in caller land 00:26
solution 2 - make logging in FS::Util optional - if you pass in a log object as an optional parameter it will log for you, if not it won't 00:27
both have pros and cons 00:32
the solution I went with is a hybrid 00:35
FS::Utils checks to see if you passed in a log obj - if you did, it uses that. If not, it checks if $self->can(log) and if it can, it uses that. If those two things fails, it returns back the info necessary for caller to log properly 00:36
00:47 rhr joined
perlmonkey2 oogles Moose 00:48
perlmonkey2 decides to spend a few hours rewriting his project at work in Moose.
00:52 bsb joined 00:55 perlmonkey2 joined
offby1 don't get fresh. 01:03
Limbic_Region stevan_ - I will be calling it a night in about 40 minutes. If you have any input and I am not around, @tell me 01:17
01:34 dolmans joined 01:47 dmq joined 02:10 rashakil joined 02:25 Schwern joined 02:40 esstone joined 02:57 justatheory joined 03:01 CardinalNumber joined
perlmonkey2 Is Perl6 OO going to look anything like Moose? 03:24
Aankhen`` A little. :-) 03:38
perlmonkey2 Reading the Synopsis on Objects right now :) 03:48
03:58 alexe joined 03:59 perlmonkey2 left 04:00 ProperNoun joined 04:09 nxu7 joined 04:13 amnesiac joined 04:27 mjk joined, obra_work joined 04:43 dduncan left 04:58 dduncan joined 06:06 mdiep joined 06:14 BooK_ joined 06:16 H0LE joined 06:20 rfordinal joined 06:23 geoffb joined 06:29 mdiep joined 06:37 bsb left 06:41 iblechbot joined 06:46 obra_work is now known as obra 06:56 Alias__ joined 06:58 mathlord joined 07:29 jisom joined 07:40 xinming_ joined
Juerd Does [ <Foo> & <!:i bar> ] dwim? 08:14
08:14 devogon joined
Juerd i.e. match /:i bar/, limited to the substring that <Foo> matched, so that if <Foo> matched foobarbaz, the entire []-group fails? 08:14
08:16 luqui joined 08:50 Alias__ joined, revdiablo joined 08:52 elmex joined 09:03 the_dormant joined 09:13 kane-xs joined 09:20 kane-xs is now known as kane_ 09:32 dduncan left 09:41 lichtkind joined, ruoso joined 10:02 buetow joined 10:08 chris2 joined
lichtkind audreyt: ping? 10:14
10:26 mdiep joined
Leibsle pongs lichtkind 10:33
10:52 iblechbot joined 10:58 andara joined 11:23 TimToady joined 11:27 IllvilJa joined 11:33 fglock joined
svnbot6 r15778 | fglock++ | PCR - RegexPerl5.pm - fixed a precedence problem 11:33
clkao fglock: you know this v6() thing in the compiled ast.pmc ? 11:42
pasteling "evalbot_r15777" at 194.145.200.126 pasted "Pugs build failure" (340 lines, 18.9K) at sial.org/pbot/23709 11:44
fglock clkao: looking 11:49
clkao: which directory is that? 11:51
clkao Pugs/Runtime/Perl6AST.pm 11:53
the last line of use v6; somehow got translated to v6()
fglock k
clkao also pcp6's makefile.pl is requiring Pugs::Emitter::Perl6::Perl5 which is in this particular pacakge? 11:54
fglock: v6 projects aren't proper packages 12:00
fglock clkao: yes, Pugs::Emitter::Perl6::Perl5 was meant to be distributed separately, but it didn't 12:03
svnbot6 r15779 | fglock++ | v6.pm - fixed parsing of 'use v5' chunks - clkao++
fglock proper packages?
clkao i mean the v6 in perl6 ones
svnbot6 r15780 | fglock++ | v6.pm - Makefile.PL - Pugs::Emitter::Perl6::Perl5 is inside the distro - clkao++ 12:06
clkao so how uptodate are docs under v6/* ?
fglock v6/v6-KindaPerl6/docs/FAQ.pod is recent; everything else may be outdated 12:07
clkao how about mp6 ? 12:08
fglock it is underdocumented, but I think it is updated
clkao bah, FAQ.pod isn't really a pod! :p 12:09
fglock hides
re package, you mean: 'grammar Xxx {...}' should be 'grammar Xxx; ... ' ? 12:12
12:12 Limbic_Region joined
clkao no, not buildable in normal process. but i see in the faq now 12:14
pasteling "evalbot_r15779" at 194.145.200.126 pasted "Pugs build failure" (343 lines, 20.2K) at sial.org/pbot/23712 12:15
fglock clkao: yes, I need to talk to audreyt and find out how what is needed to make mp6 compatible with pugs 12:16
12:38 fglock joined 12:52 fglock joined
fglock Juerd: re [ <Foo> & <!:i bar> ] - I don't think it works; S05: if you don't want your two terms to end at the same point, then you really want to use a lookahead instead 12:52
the lookahead won't try to satisfy '&'
13:46 stevan__ joined 13:48 lanny joined
lanny audreyt (or any commitbit admin): ping 13:49
13:53 iblechbot joined 14:03 forsaken joined 14:04 forsaken joined
Limbic_Region @tell lanny I missed your commitbit ping but if you @tell one of us what the problem is, we will be sure to try and correct it 14:14
lambdabot Consider it noted.
kolibrie Limbic_Region: I think lanny forgot his password is and is trying to get it reset 14:15
integral registerfly--
kolibrie obra mentioned that they are working on an interface in commitbit to do that, but it is not finished yet 14:16
Limbic_Region kolibrie - looking now but I suspect obra is correct 14:17
hrm, I can't seem to login so perhaps I forgot my password 14:18
kolibrie I'm in there, but see only 'Invite', and 'Delete' pending users 14:19
audreyt sent again. 14:20
lambdabot audreyt: You have 1 new message. '/msg lambdabot @messages' to read it.
Limbic_Region audreyt - sent to lanny?
audreyt yeah.
really need native support in commitbit
14:21 vel joined
kolibrie audreyt: so you do something on the commandline? 14:21
audreyt kolibrie: yeah. previously delete-reinvite wouldn't work as well
Limbic_Region audreyt - I briefly saw some commit about another 10% startup improvement - my smoke time actually went up about 5 minutes
audreyt because the user account isn't erased really
Limbic_Region: really? hm 14:22
Limbic_Region I'm not in a place where I can verify that ATM but will be hacking all weekend
audreyt ponders if it's another of those GHC 6.7-specific optimizations, or if it's OSX-specific, or something
cool, same here
Limbic_Region which starts in circa 6 hours
audreyt registerfly still havn't released domains to enom
been dropping emails like crazy :/
Limbic_Region :-( 14:23
audreyt the pad branch's code is almost ready; the only showstopper is that .yml doesn't deal with circular refs yet
(a pad's outer pad now contains symbols that points back to the inner pad)
[particle] Limbic_Region: who is one of us? i couldn't help him, and neither could obra 14:24
Limbic_Region ok, well putter seems to be MIA so I will be taking a look at the donate page this weekend
bbiab - work
audreyt [particle]: I'll see what I can do about this... a sec 14:26
ok. apparently. 14:27
invite again using identical nickname and password means resending password...
[particle] or resetting password and reinviting 14:28
(to prevent sending it cleartext)
audreyt er sorry
resending the-url-to-reset-password.
[particle] ah. yes. 14:29
kolibrie and the commands to do that are?
audreyt kolibrie: invite.pugscode.org 14:30
use the same email and same nicknam
click "invite again"
will do
[particle] would like to see the huge 'delete' buttons become text links
audreyt why, yes, and maybe a "resend invitation" too
[particle] yep
audreyt [particle]: I've jused tried reinviting you.
can you confirm that it works? 14:31
[particle] and appear next to the name, instead of below (or be offset somewhat from the following text)
okie
14:35 bonesss joined, perlmonkey2 joined
[particle] can't get to the page 14:35
email worked fine, and link appeared in text. clicking on link sends me to nowhereland 14:36
kolibrie :(
audreyt msg me the link
?
delete-link-next-to-name fixed
kolibrie that's cute: widget inline button button_as_link 14:40
audreyt yeah :)
it's still a button
just masquerading as a link 14:41
[particle] looks much better with that hack
it's a button while the page is still loading :)
audreyt oh well :)
Juerd fglock: I want them to begin and end at the same point, but not anchored there 14:42
fglock: i.e. the RHS must be bound to the substring that the LHS matched, because <!before .* blah> would match farther than that. 14:43
lichtkind audreyt: hello, you any mistake else? 14:48
audreyt lichtkind: no, looks fine
14:49 jiing joined 14:50 Southen_ joined
audreyt [particle]: check mail, try again (and see if the link contains the word /letme/ this time)? 14:50
[particle] link worked. attempting password reset, but it's SLOW after hitting save 14:53
in fact, didn't take me anywhere afterwards :(
audreyt oh. 14:54
fglock Juerd: one further complication is that '&' does not promise to execute the subexpressions left-to-right
audreyt [particle]: but did your password get reset?
apart from the not-taking-you-anywhere-afterwards part
[particle] i suppose there's one way to find out. i'll update & commit 14:55
audreyt the not-taking-you-anywhere bug shoudl be fixed now 14:56
Juerd fglock: && then 14:57
[particle] logout works :) 14:58
Juerd fglock: Actually, does <! pattern> exist even? :)
[particle] login takes me to nowhere. i'll try again
audreyt ...now trying login...?
Juerd Or should I use [ <Foo> && <!before pattern> .* ] instead?
[particle] same link, with ?J:RETURN=S32821_441066
Juerd Actually,
[ <Foo> && <!before .* pattern> ] 14:59
audreyt [particle]: but it did accept your (newly reset) password?
[particle] audreyt: i don't know. it didn't explicitly reject it.
audreyt: it just took me to nowhere after hitting login
audreyt ok, a sec. 15:00
[particle] the link suggests that it's redirecting me to the pugs project
fglock Juerd: [ <Foo> && <!before .* pattern> .* ] might work, after some mad backtracking
Juerd fglock: Why is the latter .* needed?
[particle] audreyt: that's a hint that it's accepting it, but not confirmation (for me)
fglock because <!...> doesn't move 'pos' 15:01
audreyt that's correct
Juerd No, but didn't the <Foo> do that for the surrounding []?
I'd expect the RHS to restore the pos
i.e. [ foo && f ] does increase pos by 3, not 1
fglock Juerd: yes, but '&&' checks that both sides finished at the same pos
Juerd Darn. I hoped it would be a submatch, not a check. 15:02
Juerd needs a translation for EBNF's A - B syntax.
fglock yes, [ foo && f ] fails
Juerd I don't see why having that fail is useful yet
[particle] juerd: i wrote an ebnf grammar for pge. *almost* complete, iirc
fglock but it's perfectly fine to do <!before ...> foo 15:03
I think that's what you actually want
Juerd [particle]: Parsing EBNF is one thing. Emitting Perl 6 grammars from it is harder, because of this A - B construct.
Actually, it's impossible, because A - B means two distinct and incompatible things in ebnf :)
fglock [ <before f > foo ] works
[particle] context-sensitive?
Juerd fglock: No, because at the time you do the <before ...>, you don't know which substring to limit it to yet 15:04
fglock: A - B means that B must NOT match on the substring that A did match
[particle]: No, sensitive to the phase of the moon :)
[particle] wonders about junctions in p6 grammars
Juerd [particle]: Consider Char* - '-'. That means that - is excluded from the "Char" class. 15:05
[particle] Juerd: can you force it to match longest token?
Juerd Yes, the quantifier is in between!
[particle] yes, it's like <char-'-'>
Juerd But Name - ( ('x'|'X') ('m'|'M') ('l'|'L') ) means that you have to do two matches
First match name, and then assert that name !~ /xml/i 15:06
15:06 stevan_ joined
Juerd That's very different, semantically, but in EBNF the same thing syntactically. 15:06
15:06 Limbic_Region joined
audreyt [particle]: login link should be fine now 15:06
Juerd So you could do something like <Name> <{ $Name !~ /xml/i }> perhaps 15:07
But I'd like a non-code pure-regex syntax
[particle] i think you'll need something like <name> { $name !~~ :i/xml/ or fail } 15:09
i don't see another way 15:10
Juerd :(
15:11 fglock joined
fglock hmm - you also have [ foo <!after pattern > ] - anything more complicated probably needs an <at> anchor 15:11
Juerd fglock: No, because that alse matches "pattern" *before* "foo" 15:12
[particle] audreyt: all works now!
Juerd B must be bound to whatever A matched
Or at least its positions
audreyt cool :)
Juerd afk
audreyt [particle]++ # $infrastructure.help 15:13
[particle] can you get the length of <foo> after it's been matched? 15:14
bbi10m
fglock lunch &
Juerd [particle]: Is that a hypothetical question? 15:15
audreyt purrs and goes offline for a bit &
[particle] juerd: i'm wondering if you can do a negative lookbehind 15:30
i assume it needs to be fixed length
15:43 mr_ank joined 15:44 justatheory joined 16:05 kanru joined 16:08 Aankhen`` joined 16:42 ivas joined 16:43 forsaken joined 17:01 falseep joined
ivas I know this is not the right place to ask, but as is seems that nobody is on the parrot channel. How would you serialize and deserialize the PMC object. Does anybody knows which PODs I need to read ? 17:22
TimToady ./docs/dev/pmc_freeze.pod maybe, from a cursory grep 17:23
or in this case, a recursory grep. :)
17:24 jisom joined
ivas thanks 17:24
17:26 ashleyb joined
[particle] ivas: we're on #parrot (irc.perl.org) 17:28
...perhaps you've been looking on freenode.
ivas sorry i have been looking on the freenode
17:31 ivas left 17:34 andara left 17:43 nwc10 joined
nwc10 audreyt: did 6-on-5 come up with a clever way of getting lexically scoped pluggable regexps in 5.8.x? 17:43
17:45 pmurias joined
pmurias hi 17:45
juerd: what would Name* - ( ('x'|'X') ('m'|'M') ('l'|'L') ) match? 17:46
s/juerd/Juerd/
TimToady I don't think Char* - '-' is notionally different--it'll still just match the longest seq of Char that doesn't contain - 17:48
[particle] TimToady: i agree 17:49
it's all easy if the named regex is a token 17:50
TimToady however, I agree that we're probably missing a primitive of some sort to do negative matching 17:51
possibly two primitives, one that does the -ish thing of &! and one that lets us retest a $0
was wondering if a subrule knows what it is going to be bound against
and if $0:=<not foo> could falsify $0 retroactively 17:52
[particle] junctional matching?
TimToady no, sequential, &! would be opposite of &&, not & 17:53
Juerd pmurias: Such things (non-charset things quantified and then -'ed) aren't seen, but I'd expect it to mean $x := <Name><Name><Name>... <{ $x !~ /xml/i }>
Though I keep mixing up <{}> and {}, so I don't know if this is the right syntax for an assertion :)
TimToady: There's a difference there, though
[particle] { $x !~~ :i/xml/ } 17:54
Juerd TimToady: In Char* - '-', it's indeed the longest thing without a -
TimToady <?{...}> is currently assertion
Juerd TimToady: In the other example, though, a name containing /xml/i is *illegal*
!~~??
TimToady there is no !~
Juerd !~~ negates ~~? 17:55
TimToady ! is a metaop that negates any logical op
Juerd Ah, so we have !== now too?
Which is !(==), not !(===)
TimToady we allow != as a shortcut
but not !~
Juerd Do we still have ===?
TimToady yes
pmurias !~ looks cute 17:56
Juerd I'd then expect a shortcut !== for that one...
TimToady and !eq is the same as ne
17:56 lambdabot joined
TimToady then you'd be wrong :) 17:56
Juerd Allowing != as as shortcut sounds like a very bad idea.
lambdabot TimToady: You have 2 new messages. '/msg lambdabot @messages' to read them.
Juerd (Only because === exists.) 17:57
17:57 marmic joined
TimToady not in the context of P5 culture 17:57
Juerd You seem to be using that argument rather arbitrarily.
TimToady when did I ever claim not to be arbitrary? :) 17:58
Juerd Perl 6 breaks Perl 5 "culture" almost everywhere.
nwc10 rules 1 and 2 still seem to survive :-)
Juerd In fact, the very simple inconsistency between != (allowed, because of Perl 5 culture) and !~ (disallowed, because...?) bother me.
Perl 5 culture also had !~. 17:59
[particle] so don't use !=
Juerd (has)
[particle]: I'm thinking about all the mistakes that /other/ people will make.
kolibrie so != is the same as !== ?
TimToady yes
[particle] kolibrie: yes 18:00
Juerd kolibrie: But !== isn't the same as !=== (!)
And !~ isn't the same as !~~
kolibrie it does seem a little inconsistent
Juerd There's just this special case (red flag, alarm bells, orange strobe beacons!) for !=
TimToady and ne
Juerd ne is okay, for visual reasosn. 18:01
18:01 forsaken joined
TimToady so's != 18:01
18:01 polettix joined
Juerd I'd totally accept != as a shortcut if === didn't exist, and !~ was added too. 18:01
TimToady the negation of === is !===
Juerd != is visually confusing with !===, especially if you factor in Perl 5.
TimToady only if you're blind 18:02
Juerd If != works as the negative version of ==, then people will expect !== to work as the negative version of ===
TimToady no they won't
Juerd Yes, they will. They really will.
18:03 justatheory joined
kolibrie I think people might get confused 18:03
Juerd But you've made up your mind; Trying to convince you is kind of useless, I reckon, and flaming doesn't get anyone anywhere... :)
Juerd adds to the Perlego6 list: remove != alias
dmq mental note: dont wash your free donor card. 18:04
ajs_ Juerd: I'm not sure that's true. It is, potentially a PR issue, but the real issue is that 90% of folks are never going to use ===. They'll use == and ~~ and that's about it.
Juerd ajs_: Low usage frequency on a short operator is, to me, a reason to /be extra careful/ to avoid confusion.
pmurias javascript uses !== as !=== 18:05
Juerd Again, I wouldn't mind if === were called something else and !~ was added too (for the same Perl 5 cultural reason)
[particle] i think the spec is clear.
TimToady metaops in Perl 6 are never replacement characters
Juerd [particle]: Very few people read that, or all of the documentation. And those who do read what we want them to read, will forget.
TimToady that's a simple fact to teach
[particle] it's a contraction. 18:06
Juerd TimToady: I agree that !== and !=== and !eq and !~~ and !<anything> are very easy to teach. I like them a lot, even though I just learned about them a few minutes ago.
TimToady: But != isn't so easy to teach.
Because it's a special case. And any single special case is simple, but is a dangerous precedent, and several special cases together make for a very hard to teach language.
If !== : == :: !=== : ===, then it's reasonable to expect that != : = 18:07
[particle] coming from p5 culture, there aren't nearly enough special cases in p6.
Juerd And if != : ==, then people assuming !~ : ~~ are to be expected too.
[particle]: I love that Perl 6 removes many special cases. I'm sorry that it adds a few dozen new ones. 18:08
[particle] sure, like the unnecessary % and @ sigils. 18:09
but i'll use them, even though they're special cases.
Juerd Everything more than bare ASM is unnecessary.
[particle] that's totally untrue.
ajs_ Perl 6 regularizes where irregularity has caused pain. It does not regularize for its own sake.
Juerd Some unnecessary things are worth it. I think != is not.
[particle] programming languages are for the programmer, not for the hardware. 18:10
Juerd [particle]: Yes, but that argument can be used for either side, apparently.
ajs_ There are sides, now?
TimToady I'm frequently on both sides myself. :) 18:11
Juerd ajs_: Always.
ajs_: for versus against, usually
[particle] perls have an infinite number of sides
TimToady I'm usually against against. 18:12
[particle] ...or maybe they only have one side.
Juerd is just so happy with Perl 6's flexibility. I can create my own dialect, without forking the language. Lovely.
And even nicer is that many, many people will do this. There'll be so many Perls to choose from...!
(And that's a good thing, right? Is it?)
[particle] a string of perls
TimToady as long as they all predeclare their linguistic pedigree, it's fine. 18:13
[particle] would make life easier of people did that, too.
TimToady but you don't have to declare anything to not use !=
Juerd My dialect will be called perlego :)
TimToady: I want others who work for me to not use it, and code written by others to not use it. 18:14
TimToady then tell them not to. :)
Juerd That doesn't work.
TimToady oh well 18:15
18:15 offby1 joined
Juerd Can't tell every CPAN contributer to not use it. 18:15
ajs_ I want others to not use negative numbers, but I don't get very far with that....
Juerd But I can host a copy of CPAN that doesn't use it.
TimToady the phrase "out of proportion" comes to mind...
Juerd It's like an enforced Best Practices set. 18:16
pmurias you could write a plugin for your editor to display != as !==
Juerd pmurias: Sure I could.
xinming_ the more interesting thing might be, many people will programming using his mother language in perl 6.
Juerd That's very besides the point, though.
I'm thinking of the implications for teaching and using Perl in coding teams.
[particle] coding standards and code reviews Work. 18:17
nwc10 forget perltidy. we'll have perl6[sanity|babel] that converts everyone else's code to your preferred dialect, before you go insane
pmurias probably most programmers know what != means
Juerd There's a reason that many people pick other languages over Perl, and Perl 6 is in many ways a good solution to this problem. And perhaps, if I'm in time, I can set a easier-to-learn standard.
TimToady learnability is not the highest goal of Perl 18:18
Juerd pmurias: Yes, but knowing that != has to do with ==, it's too easy to assume that !== will have to do with ===.
TimToady there has to be something left over for the faq... 18:19
18:19 fglock joined
Juerd TimToady: Yes, but I'd like the FAQ to mostly discuss dwimmery and semantics, not syntax. 18:19
kolibrie I did get confused about != after seeing several !~~, just seemed natural that != would have been replaced with !==
[particle] != is dwimmery :)
Juerd kolibrie: It is. It's the != alias that I'm afraid will hurt.
TimToady kolibrie: it was
kolibrie will just use !== then 18:20
TimToady I don't think removing != will prevent people from confusing !=== with !==
Juerd I will too.
TimToady: It won't prevent. It will limit the number.
ajs_ "use strict :noaliases :longvariables :bondagemeharder :dontletmesnackbetweenmeals :max80cols :musthavetrailingsemi :Juerd" 18:22
Juerd #!/usr/bin/perlego
xinming_ agrees with Juerd, for what he ever said.
Juerd ajs_: I will only limit things that I think are very wrong. 18:23
ajs_: I believe in the flexibility of Perl.
ajs_ Juerd: And I think those two are mutually exclusive, but that's OK too ;)
fglock nwc10: re pluggable regexps - do you mean pluggable regex engines? 18:24
[particle] well, there's always Inline::Perl6 to get around perlego
Juerd [particle]: Of course.
nwc10 fglock: yes
Juerd And maybe it'll be a lexical "use perlego". I dunno yet.
TimToady I think it's bad to mix Greek with non-Greek roots... 18:25
Juerd The primary reason that I want perlego is still <-> though :)
All other issues are secondary. 18:26
18:27 ozo_ joined
TimToady speaking of special cases... 18:27
fglock nwc10: at compile-time, it is not a problem (but currently not implemented); at runtime, it would depend on what the p5 libraries support
Juerd I think the implicit "$_ is rw" default is a worse special case.
nwc10 fglock: did anyone actually get anything working?
Juerd Either rw should be the default, or the $_ default should be ro too.
nwc10 as best I can tell, the current interface that re.pm uses makes rather a lot of assumptions that your regexp bytecode is the same as the core's 18:28
Juerd So Perlego makes -> always default to ro, with arrowless invocation defaulting to <->
so for @array { ... } won't change, only for @array -> { ... } will.
Or, hm, I'm not sure if an empty param list for -> actually defaults to $_. Probably not even.
In that case, it'll even be fully compatible. 18:29
afk # pain in hands 18:30
fglock nwc10: avar is working on it; there is already some published modules in CPAN (re::engine::*)
TimToady fglock: does a subrule know what it's going to be bound to?
well, it probably doesn't matter, since it's probably bad to overload := to something else... 18:31
fglock TimToady: not sure what you mean, have an example? 18:32
TimToady was wondering if $0:=<not foo> could fail if $0 doesn't contain foo, but it's a bad idea. 18:33
fglock ok (but it would be possible) 18:34
[particle] so, is it just syntax we need at that point? $0::=<...> ? 18:37
TimToady we seem to be missing two syntaxes
one that does <Foo> and not bar 18:38
and one that says $0 not bar
fglock nwc10: re::engine is actually independent on the p5 regexp bytecode; it only depends on the regex API
TimToady where the latter also presumably wants "$0 true bar" as well.
currently we relegate matches against a binding to a <?{...}> 18:39
[particle] <foo!bar>
TimToady and that's not something that generalizes to other languages
we'd like to allow EBNF to translate directly
[particle] indeed.
i think i lost my ebnf parser :( 18:40
TimToady we have &&, but that only handles positive on the right
[particle] i used it to parse itself
TimToady so thinking something like &&! for "match same length but can't contain..." 18:42
18:43 tapple joined
pmurias particle: it was writen in ebnf? 18:43
s/writen/written/
TimToady and maybe $0 ~~ [ bar ] and $0 !~~ [ bar ] for the match previous binding case. 18:44
[particle] i should be more clear.
TimToady would mean ~ and ! are new metachars after a variable 18:45
18:45 tapple left
TimToady clearly 18:45
[particle] i used the ebnf grammar to create a p6 grammar to parse ebnf. to test it, i fed it the ebnf grammar.
TimToady: it looks a bit funny with the spaces, if this is to be inside a regex 18:47
TimToady we allow $0 := <rule>
[particle] $0**{2}
pmurias [particle]: you used the grammar in the ISO spec? 18:48
[particle] pmurias: i believe so. i fear it was lost last november when my laptop died
TimToady could also go with something like <match $0 bar> and <!match $0 bar>
[particle] so, modulo the missing pieces we're talking about now, it's definitely possible to do. 18:49
TimToady but then we're special casing the parsing of that
[particle] <match $0~~bar>
TimToady unfortunately <$0> is taken, unless we lookahead and make <$0~~bar> do something else 18:50
<~~ $0 bar> is kinda weird
[particle]: that's legal only if bare $0~~bar is legal
[particle] pmurias: i'd like an ebnf front end to pge. 18:51
TimToady: yeah, i know :( -- but it's good to see more options
TimToady nod
<$0? bar> and <$0! bar> maybe. 18:52
getting a bit terse 18:53
and not really like any other matching syntax
or <=$0 bar> <!=$0 bar> 18:54
(the latter just being ! applied to the former) 18:55
<match($0,/bar/)> is unfortunately getting back towards assuming Perl 18:56
[particle] with <$0? bar>, you want the space there to denote the following is a regex? 18:58
18:58 nxu7-wrk joined
TimToady space there doesn't matter, but space before ? would 18:58
[particle] sure 18:59
i'm thinking about current constructs
TimToady and <$0?: string> is a bit out there
[particle] looks too much like perl 5
that is, terse and confusing 19:00
TimToady <:match<$0> bar> <!:match<$0> bar>
fglock TimToady: hmm - you are trying to enforce that Perl6-Regex and Perl6 are separate languages?
TimToady I'm trying to make P6 regex language a little more borrowable by other languages 19:01
[particle] <:$0 bar> <!:$0 bar>
fglock yep
TimToady would be nice if everyone's translation of EBNF to p6cre was the same
rather than having p6cre invent new non-p6 syntax 19:02
<:($0) bar> <!:($0) bar> would fit current adverbs better 19:03
:$0 would be more like '0' => $0 19:04
in p6-think
[particle] true
the parens are distracting, but not exactly overloaded
TimToady we're kinda going with extended identifier using adverbs elsewhere 19:05
"use foo:from<Python>"
so maybe it's <match:($0) bar>, though we'd have to break current : 19:06
[particle] might be trouble with a rule named <match>
for the human, not the computer
TimToady <if:($0) bar> 19:07
[particle] <??:($0) bar> # now we're talking perl 5
TimToady <also:($0) bar>, though <!also> is weird
<true:($0) bar> <not:($0) bar> but then we waste ! prefix
pity "submatch" is so long 19:08
but maybe worth it huffmanly speaking
<submatch($0) bar>
<!submatch($0) bar> 19:09
[particle] how about a cap somewhere?
like TOP
TimToady not magically called
[particle] <SUBMATCH($0) bar> is ugly though
so, just another builtin rule, like <ws>? 19:10
TimToady <can:($0) bar> :) 19:11
<does:<$fido> bark>
fglock fail / assert ?
TimToady I think fail's argument should be a message, if anything 19:12
just to be the same as outside regex
biab & 19:14
19:19 prly_ joined
kolibrie <submatch($0) bar> almost makes sense without too much thought, which is better than all the others, which left me puzzling for a while 19:20
TimToady which makes me wonder if <foo bar> is just a <foo() bar>, and if so, how does /bar/ show up in the arguments to foo(). 19:25
avar fglock: heya:)
TimToady is <foo($0) bar> equiv to <foo($0,/bar/)> or <foo($0,:regex(/bar/)> or <foo(/bar/,$0)> or something else... 19:27
named would make it easier to have default args without confusion 19:28
[particle] <foo:($0) bar>
TimToady otherwise <foo() bar> would tend to put /bar/ where you weren't expecting it. 19:29
except the foo:($0) is really intended for extending the name foo at compile time.
19:29 prly__ joined
TimToady infix:<+> for instance 19:29
[particle] hrmm
TimToady but I kinda like the <foo()> extending into <foo() more> 19:30
19:30 Leibsle joined
TimToady it's kind of arbitrary that <foo( always has to end )> 19:30
might even get away with <Foo> && <!submatch bar> for the other syntax, if submatch can be taught to default to the left of the && somehow 19:31
Juerd I'd almost suggest introducing an infix ~~ in regexes 19:34
TimToady I already suggested it earlier. :) 19:35
Juerd Ah
lichtkind TimToady: is in in the S?
TimToady in?
[particle] no, it's just in the channel 19:36
lichtkind in the synopses i mean is it oficcial?
TimToady is what official? 19:37
lichtkind i asked if the infix ~~ is officially part of perl6
or juist a rant
TimToady infix:<~~> is certainly official for normal Perl code. we're talking about whether we could use it within a regex 19:38
Juerd It'd be begging for a !~~ too
kolibrie who's on first
TimToady and then ~ and ! would have to be treated as metacharacters following $var
Juerd And then you'd just have <Foo> && $?Foo !~~ <submatch :i xml> 19:39
But ~~ wants // in my fingers... :S
And while it's very doable to mechanically parse /<Foo> && $Foo !~~ /:i xml//, it looks weird 19:40
$<Foo>
TimToady and you still haven't satisfied && for ending at the same place. 19:41
Juerd I'm still assuming it'll do that by default ;)
(read: hoping)
But now that I actually mentioned it, it'll never happen of course :) 19:42
TimToady ~~ is an assertion
so zero width
19:42 the_dormant joined
lichtkind ah thanks 19:43
Juerd <ebnf_minus ...> # desperate :)
TimToady lol
Juerd <but_not ...> 19:44
no ebnf :because<IT SUCKS>; 19:45
TimToady at the moment it's looking like <Foo> && <!submatch bar> .* can be made to work, if submatch can access the left of && somehow
Juerd Is there a list of current metachars?
I'm thinking of an arrow of some kind 19:46
TimToady yeah, but if it gets any longer we might as well make all punctuation metachars...
Juerd <Foo> ==> <!submatch bar>
Yes, that's why I'd want an arrow that begins with an existing metachar.
pmurias TimToady: it would be consistent
Juerd Very consistent, and forward-compatible. 19:47
\w characters are literal unless escaped, \W characters are meta unless escaped
TimToady presumably that gives you your '"' and "'" too
Juerd :)
Is it wise to bring up /$foo/ again? :) 19:48
TimToady no, or you're break $0 19:49
19:49 prly joined
Juerd Break how? 19:49
TimToady $0 should match literally, I think
Juerd No, literal matches are "" ;)
"$0"
But I see your point. It's hard to please both my brain cells... :) 19:50
Maybe $0 behaves differently in... REGEX CONTEXT! (oh my) 19:51
TimToady but it'd free up <$0 bar> and <!$0 bar>
Juerd Ah, another good point.
Though would that be used much?
TimToady <Foo> && <!$<Foo> bar> .* 19:52
Juerd Ah yes. Yea.
I could get used to that. Easily :)
TimToady I would need to think about this a lot. 19:53
pmurias is there a way to negate a pattern
[particle] <!$.Foo bar>
pmurias what does $.Foo mean?
19:54 prly_ joined
Juerd has $.Foo = rx/.../; #? 19:54
pmurias and bar?
Juerd Argument.
pmurias would rule && <!exception> be enough for ebnf exceptions 19:56
?
s/would/wouldn't/
Juerd If there was an intelligent "exception" rule 19:57
TimToady would have to recognize assertions and supply an implicit .*
might be enough to simply recognize that the assertion would always fail and warn them that they need .* 19:58
pmurias explain please
[particle] heh, rerehash
TimToady an && requires the same length on both sides, or it's just a lookahead
foo && ^ can never match, for instance, even at the beginning of the string. 19:59
foo && ^.* would match after 3 chars though
fglock avar: hi 20:02
pmurias i understand that part, \w+ && <not aaa> #{<not ...> is make up} , shouldn't match aaa but should match aaaa 20:06
20:06 perlmonkey2 left
pmurias a none-zero width <!...> would help here 20:08
TimToady that would depend on how 'not' views the implicit anchors supplied by &&
Juerd pmurias: What would the width be? :) 20:09
[particle] maybe &&& provides anchors to the rhs ;) 20:10
Juerd And maybe &&&& adds verbose debugging
[particle] :) 20:11
20:11 prly joined
[particle] foo <dwim> bar 20:11
Juerd (And all this time, I'm not even 100% sure that EBNF works this way...) 20:12
TimToady as long as we can express either meaning, we're fine :) 20:13
Juerd True 20:14
And even if EBNF should not work this way, it'll still be a useful construct.
TimToady we do need to try to pay attention to declarative vs procedural assumptions though. 20:15
20:20 Belaf joined
pmurias Juerd: got pretty confused, * most likly 20:21
:)
ajs_ TimToady: So, in the above, you want to perform a match against a match that happened previously? e.g. "string contains some number of digits where the matched digits contain the sequence '123'"? 20:29
And the concern is that / (\d+) <{$0 ~~ /123/}> / is not supportable in non-Perl Rule users? 20:30
TimToady yes
Juerd Pretty much
TimToady but also that things with closures must be analyzed as procedural rather than declarational. 20:34
[particle] declarative? 20:35
same thing, right?
TimToady nod
[particle] hrmm this reminds me of how pge jumps between top-down, bottom-up, and custom parsers 20:36
provide a rule that signals the transition 20:37
ajs_ You could get the same effect by issuing the two patterns together and never referncing $0 at all. e.g. / (\d+ <contains 123>) / The start-of-group gives a handy anchor for the <contains> to start from
Juerd Is «» taken yet? 20:38
TimToady not at the moment 20:39
Juerd *evil grin* 20:40
nwc10 oh, what is »|« ? 20:45
Juerd nwc10: Do you know what »+« is?
ajs_ Juerd: What came between Is and taken? I think I may have font/character set issues here.
nwc10 [I hope I got the utf-8 right. I'm happily in luddite latin-1 land]
Juerd ajs_: <<>>
nwc10 juerd it's hyper plus, of some sort
Juerd nwc10: Yes. »|« is hypered pipe, the disjunction constructor 20:46
nwc10 so you'd get a list of disjunctions, from the lists on either side of the operator?
Juerd Yep 20:47
20:47 turrepurre joined
fglock how about if '&&' didn't require the end position to be the same; just set the resulting pos to the longest pos 20:54
TimToady then it's no different from a lookahead
(assuming you know which is shorter) 20:55
and doesn't really solve the "not" problem.
Juerd :not 20:56
m:not/foo/
<Foo> && <$<Foo> :not bar> # nah.
fglock what if you say that '&&' operates on whatever is matched by the left side 20:59
[particle] sounds like ~~ to me 21:00
21:00 ajs joined
Juerd fglock: That was my initial idea, but apparently there are uses for an && that works as currently specced 21:01
fglock but I think these uses are now covered by '&'
21:02 fglock left 21:04 dduncan joined
TimToady bbl & 21:05
21:06 Psyche^ joined 21:08 geoffb joined 21:22 Psyche^ is now known as Patterner 21:39 devogon joined 21:44 buetow joined 21:50 pelagic joined
pelagic msg nickserv register <your-password> 21:59
22:00 Alneyan joined 22:31 Psyche^ joined 22:42 nwc10 left, forsaken joined 22:47 Psyche^ is now known as Patterner 22:57 ProperNoun joined 23:09 drupek12 joined 23:21 macli left 23:23 Limbic_Region joined 23:30 perlmonkey2 joined
Limbic_Region ?seen stevan_ 23:30
lambdabot stevan_ is in #perl6. I don't know when stevan_ last spoke.
Limbic_Region he spoke last night - to me in fact
lambdabot Limbic_Region: You have 1 new message. '/msg lambdabot @messages' to read it.
Limbic_Region @moosages
lambdabot diakopter said 10d 10h 8m 22s ago: :P
Limbic_Region lambdabot is b0rk 23:31
I already received that message and yet a different message that gaal left for me is no where to be found
@messages 23:33
lambdabot You don't have any new messages.
Limbic_Region liar
23:34 [particle] left 23:38 mjk joined
allbery_b lambdabot did get restarted at some point 23:55
probably lost some state :(
23:57 ruoso joined 23:58 larsen_ joined

Powered by Cro and the Raku® Programming Language.

Please report any issues / comments / feature requests as an issue on App::Raku::Log.

Thank you!