pugscode.org/ | nopaste: sial.org/pbot/perl6 | pugs: [~] <m oo se> (or rakudo:, kp6:, smop: etc.) || We do Haskell, too | > reverse . show $ foldl1 (*) [1..4] | irclog: irc.pugscode.org/
Set by TimToady on 25 January 2008.
00:05 thoughtpolice left 00:06 thoughtpolice joined
meppl good night 00:32
00:33 meppl left 00:38 polettix left 00:40 wknight8111 joined
wknight8111 Is Rakudo development still in the Parrot SVN at languages/perl6? 00:41
obra I believe so 00:43
Tene wknight8111: yes.
wknight8111 I've been having a lot of problems when testing Rakudo. Simple things like declaring and using variables fail 00:46
and I have the most recent version from the SVN, which is why I asked if it was the current development version
Khisanth svn log :) 00:48
00:49 justatheory left 00:52 justatheory joined
wknight8111 For instance, the following code fails: my $x = 5; say $x; 00:54
I'll either get an error that the second statement wasn't terminated correctly, or that there was specified scope for $x 00:55
no specified scope *
"No scope found for PAST::Var '$x'" 00:56
01:03 Lorn joined
ruoso rakudo: my $x = 5; say $x; 01:14
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[5ā¤]
ruoso wknight8111, are you sure you have it built right? 01:15
perl6: my $x=5; say $x;
exp_evalbot kp6: OUTPUT[5ā¤]
..pugs: OUTPUT[5ā¤]
..rakudo: OUTPUT[5ā¤]
01:18 devogon left
nothingmuch @tell ruoso precisely.. it must be extened because you can't have every method call be implemented in terms of about 3 other method calls, it has to be faked at the lowest level, that's why it must be extended and not replaced 01:23
lambdabot Consider it noted.
wknight8111 ruoso, I'm pretty sure I have it built right 01:24
i ran the makefile, no errors popped up
although I am on Windows, so who knows what is considered "right" anymore
nothingmuch wknight8111: he's not in chan 01:33
dunno if he backlogs, but I'd use lambdabot 01:34
01:42 sunnavy joined 01:46 achermov joined
achermov Is there a module that'll let me embed Perl code into web pages, PHP style? 01:49
01:54 adu joined
wknight8111 achermov, perl6 or perl5? 01:57
achermov irrelevant now. I got an answer elsewhere. Thanks though.
wknight8111 no problem
01:58 achermov left 02:02 zakame joined 02:04 eternaleye_ joined, eternaleye left, eternaleye_ is now known as eternaleye 02:21 adu left 02:23 lambdabot left 02:24 lambdabot joined 02:25 Jedai left 02:43 zakame_ joined, zakame left 02:44 zakame_ is now known as zakame 03:04 zakame_ joined 03:05 zakame left, zakame_ is now known as zakame 03:11 Auzon joined
pugs_svn r19884 | putter++ | [misc/red_STD] started circumfix support. "(2+3)*4" now barely works. 03:22
mncharity fyi, it runs with off-the-shelf ruby (1.8, rather than the new 1.9). ruby std.rb will hand you a read-eval-print-loop to play with. currently parses almost nothing of course. 03:25
Auzon What's red_STD? 03:26
mncharity # A ruby transliteration of src/perl6/STD.pm 03:28
Auzon Neat :)
mncharity basically, STD.pm currently runs by being highly massaged into p6 which runs on pugs. so you spend a great deal of time trying to work around pugs bugs, and the development process is slow. objective of red_STD is to be fully runable within a person week or two. to help shake down STD.pm, and perhaps be a front-end for something. 03:32
03:33 Andy_ joined
mncharity re Neat, :) yeah, could be. 03:35
03:45 zakame_ joined 03:46 alester left 03:51 zakame left, zakame_ is now known as zakame 03:53 drbean joined 03:58 wknight8111 is now known as wknight-away 04:02 zakame_ joined 04:06 zakame left 04:19 zakame_ is now known as zakame 04:24 wknight-away left 04:27 eternaleye left 04:36 adu joined 04:39 chacha_chaudhry joined 04:41 chacha_chaudhry left
pugs_svn r19885 | putter++ | src/perl6/STD.pm: in UNIT, fixed typo in rule name. 04:51
04:52 thoughtpolice left 04:56 nerog left 05:14 drbean left
pugs_svn r19886 | putter++ | [misc/red_STD] can parse "3" from _TOP. also "3;4". tweaked eat_terminator. 05:15
05:19 zakame left 05:23 zakame joined 05:24 justatheory left 05:34 monomorph joined 05:36 mncharity left 05:52 monomorph left 05:57 zakame_ joined 05:59 zakame left 06:00 DarkWolf84 left 06:52 zakame__ joined 06:53 zakame__ is now known as zakame 06:59 devogon joined 07:02 eternaleye joined 07:03 zakame_ left 07:34 psapo joined 07:53 Aankhen`` joined, iblechbot joined 07:57 drbean joined 08:00 polettix joined 08:01 zakame left, zakame joined 08:15 polettix left 08:24 adu left
moritz_ @tell wknight8111 if you test rakudo, don't use the REPL loop for now, it causes rakudo to segfault on some variable declarations (known bug) 08:27
lambdabot Consider it noted.
08:42 meppl joined 08:45 blindfish joined 09:00 viklund joined, zakame_ joined 09:04 zakame_ left 09:05 zakame_ joined 09:15 zakame left 09:21 zakame_ left 09:24 zakame joined 09:26 baest left 09:32 zakame_ joined 09:38 thepler_ joined 09:49 baest joined 09:50 zakame left 09:54 baest left 10:01 baest joined 10:07 IllvilJa joined 10:10 tooo joined
wolverian kp6: state $foo = 2; 10:13
exp_evalbot r19886: OUTPUT[syntax error at - line 12, near ") ā¤;"ā¤syntax error at - line 18, near ","ā¤ (Might be a runaway multi-line '' string starting on line 16)ā¤syntax error at - line 21, near "1 }"ā¤Execution of - aborted due to compilation errors.ā¤]
wolverian hmm
rakudo: state $foo = 2
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[scope declarator 'state' not implemented at line 1, near "= 2"ā¤current instr.: 'parrot;PGE::Util;die' pc 120 (runtime/parrot/library/PGE/Util.pir:82)ā¤called from Sub 'parrot;Perl6;Grammar;Actions;_block1295' pc 81842 (src/gen_actions.pir:2778)ā¤called from Sub
..'parrot;Perl6;Grammar;Actions;_block1278' pc 80777 (src/gen_actions.pir:2358)ā¤ca...
wolverian does anything implement state yet? :(
scsys.co.uk:8001/12729 I'm wondering whether this is what perl6 would do as well
(jrockway noticed it) 10:14
10:18 pbuetow joined 10:20 ebassi joined 10:24 ruoso joined
moritz_ wolverian: perl 5.10 does ;9 10:30
pugs: state $foo = 3 10:31
exp_evalbot RESULT[\3]
10:33 zakame__ joined
wolverian moritz_, see the paste. I wanted to compare perl5 and perl6 in this respect 10:33
10:34 zakame__ is now known as zakame
moritz_ did you try pugs? 10:35
10:40 zakame_ left 10:53 zamolxes joined
ruoso hi 10:54
moritz_ hi ruoso ;)
obra morning
ruoso well... it's monday... so... 10:55
moritz_ ruoso: I see you found more followers ;)
erm, commiters ;)
ruoso heh...
I'm very happy by the fact that smop is getting into Perl 6 radar
and specially happy to see #p5p people interested in it... 10:56
obra I'm happy about it too :)
ruoso @tell nothingmuch I'm not pretty sure I'm getting what you mean... :) 10:58
lambdabot Consider it noted.
11:00 zamolxes_ joined 11:02 zamolxes left 11:07 zamolxes joined
ruoso is there any documentation on what the API for Array and Hash must be? or are the implementations supposed to figure that out? 11:07
11:09 zamolxes_ left 11:10 funktio joined 11:15 zamolxes_ joined 11:17 zamolxes left 11:19 lisppaste3 joined 11:22 zamolxes joined
cognominal_ is there a for @argv -> $_, $i {} sometimes one wants to iterate but have a counter too 11:24
moritz_ ruoso: in S29 there is an overview about available methods
cognominal_ arf, may be that means I get inti @arfv two by two 11:25
moritz_ cognominal_: you'd use for @arv zip 0..* -> $a, $counter {...}
11:25 zamolxes_ left
cognominal_ nice 11:25
I don't think about zip even if I learnt some haskell 11:26
moritz_ it will be a FAQ, trust me ;)
cognominal_ I read the synopses but not enough code, my perl6 is passive so far 11:28
STD.pm is good reading
moritz_ it's a harsh introduction, either way 11:29
11:29 zamolxes_ joined
cognominal_ but STD.pm a very good followup to the synopses 11:29
I am trying to translate Getopt/Obj.pir in a perl6 grokable by rakudo 11:31
11:32 zamolxes left
moritz_ cognominal_: there is also ext/Getopt-{Long,Process,Std} in the pugs repo 11:32
cognominal_ but none of them is an exact translation of Getopt/Obj.pir ? 11:33
11:36 zamolxes joined 11:39 zamolxes_ left 11:42 meppl left 11:44 zamolxes_ joined 11:46 zamolxes left
moritz_ I'd guess they're all hand coded 11:48
11:51 zamolxes joined 11:53 zamolxes_ left
ruoso moritz_, thanks 11:54
11:56 mj41 joined 11:58 zamolxes_ joined
moritz_ ruoso: I'll be at the German Perl Workshop this week... maybe I can ask some people if they are interested in smop, and where to get funding 11:58
ruoso moritz_, that would be great 11:59
moritz_ does thrading work atm?
12:00 zamolxes left
ruoso in theory, yes... 12:02
I need to create a new test that deals with it,
but all the code is supposed to be thread-safe
that means you can have two threads running different interpreter instances 12:03
and they can even call methods in objects they share
moritz_ ok, thanks
12:05 zamolxes joined 12:08 zamolxes_ left 12:12 zamolxes_ joined 12:15 zamolxes left 12:20 zamolxes joined 12:22 kcwu joined 12:23 zamolxes_ left, xinming joined 12:28 zamolxes_ joined 12:30 zamolxes left 12:35 zamolxes joined
ruoso I made a review in the REPR API, considering the realisation that "an Array is anything that identifies itself as one" -- www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index....mop_oo_api -- as usual, any review is appreciated 12:36
lambdabot Title: SMOP OO API / Perl 6
12:38 zamolxes_ left 12:41 cmarcelo joined 12:42 zamolxes_ joined 12:43 zamolxes left 12:47 ebassi left 12:49 zamolxes joined 12:50 ebassi joined 12:51 zamolxes_ left 12:54 zamolxes_ joined, zamolxes_ left 12:58 zamolxes left
pugs_svn r19887 | ruoso++ | [smop] threading test added. And yes, it works :) 13:00
ruoso moritz_, ^
13:00 lidden joined 13:01 zamolxes joined
pugs_svn r19888 | ruoso++ | [smop] now 09_threads.t have two rw threads and one ro thread... added a usleep also to make its more concurrent... 13:06
13:11 zamolxes_ joined 13:13 zamolxes left, njbartlett left 13:15 njbartlett joined 13:17 zamolxes joined 13:21 zamolxes_ left 13:27 zamolxes left 13:32 Psyche^ joined, Psyche^ is now known as Patterner 13:38 njbartlett left 13:43 renormalist joined 13:49 Zygo joined 13:56 andara joined 13:57 Lorn left, Lorn_ joined 14:01 Andy_ left, drbean left 14:04 monomorph joined 14:12 renormalist left 14:14 Jedai joined 14:26 stevan_ joined 14:56 ebassi is now known as ebassi|afk 14:58 alester joined, andara left 14:59 jhorwitz joined 15:01 zamolxes joined 15:03 manfred joined 15:05 jferrero joined 15:12 chris2 joined 15:21 zamolxes left 15:24 viklund left 15:26 test left, viklund joined 15:33 PerlJam joined
pugs_svn r19889 | ruoso++ | [smop] added the interpreter %p in the 09_threads.t test output to show that the code is being run by different threads. 15:38
15:41 rdice joined 15:46 zamolxes joined 15:54 ilbot2 joined 15:56 Auzon left, moritz joined, moritz is now known as moritz_
ruoso moritz_, did you see the new test? 15:57
moritz_ ruoso: no, sorry, disconnect and all :/
ruoso test/09_threads.t
16:03 ebassi|afk is now known as ebassi
ruoso TimToady, I think I've reached a sane API for the SMOP OO... Could you please take a look at www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index....mop_oo_api when you have some time? 16:05
lambdabot Title: SMOP OO API / Perl 6
ruoso If that's really sane, I should start implementing p6opaque 16:07
16:10 sri_work joined 16:11 pmurias joined
pmurias ruoso: what will the identifier part of a message call be in real smop code 16:12
?
ruoso pmurias, hm? 16:13
it's an Object
the only difference is that the constant identifiers can be used to optimize the dispatch 16:14
pmurias ruoso: is it intended to be a string in no-optimized code?
ruoso yes
as string reads "anything that complies to the string api" 16:15
pmurias ruoso: won't it be hard to call objects which take constant identifiers from "high-level" code 16:22
?
ruoso in theory, the compiler *should* use the constant identifiers from the high-level code
whenever it can, of course
this constant identifiers are Objects just like String 16:23
they just have a different representation
a different responder interface
pmurias ruoso: it could be possible to make the objects to accepts string also 16:24
ruoso: the idconst identifiers implement the String API?
ruoso they will 16:25
they don't do it yet
but they must do it
pmurias are they a big speedup?
ruoso certainly
if it is a constant identifier I can simply compare the pointers
and avoid any string comparision at all 16:26
in the lowlevel it can be translated to: if (identifier == SMOP__ID__new) 16:27
while String will require a cast to a native type
and then a comparision of the native type afterwards
16:28 zamolxes left
ruoso if they have the same type 16:28
it is possible to have a direct cmp
but even then, I think casting to native and comparing is probably faster than comparing in non-native 16:29
pmurias i get the picture 16:32
16:44 meppl joined
pmurias ruoso: if a class we inherit from changes it's ancestors we have to update our composition pile? 16:49
(under C3) 16:50
moritz_ a class can change its anchestors? scary...
pmurias moritz_: is it forbiden?
moritz_ pmurias: I think you can add anchestors, but can you delete them? 16:51
ruoso pmurias, the composition pile only refers to *this class* ancestors
moritz_ $class is also { is Other::Anchestor }
ruoso not recursively
the MRO is recursive 16:52
pmurias ok
ruoso cache must be external
as it needs to be invalidated globally whenever some class is changed 16:53
pmurias s1p code is translated into C? 17:07
or sm0p?
ruoso s1p code is translated to C + sm0p
with the code that builds that class
17:08 rindolf joined
ruoso with probably two C functions 17:10
SMOP__S1P__Object__BUILD
and
SMOP__S1P__Object__DESTROY 17:11
to initialize and destroy the prototype
17:13 TJCRI joined
pmurias the c will be used for setting up and sm0p for the method bodies? 17:14
i guess not, based on www.perlfoundation.org/perl6/index....p_language 17:18
lambdabot Title: SMOP s1p Language / Perl 6
17:20 tooo left 17:23 kst joined 17:24 justatheory joined, Psyche^ joined 17:35 smtms joined 17:40 Patterner left, Psyche^ is now known as Patterner 17:55 Lorn__ joined 18:02 zakame left 18:05 rindolf left
ruoso pmurias, yes... the s1p method bodies will be translated to a set of sm0p blocks each 18:06
the C code will be the code sorrounding this blocks to build them 18:07
TimToady ruoso: okay, looked at it 18:09
basically sane, though I have some quibbles and questions
18:10 meppel-san joined
TimToady Object's BUILD/DESTROY I envisioned as being methods that attempt to do something useful if the actual object doesn't define the submethod 18:10
some reprs could autogen a BUILD on demand, for instance
but at minimum it could complain about there being no BUILD submethod for the class
maybe that's not how it should be, but it's how I was picturing it 18:11
lessee...
you don't need any of those trailing semicolons
a final } on a line always implies ;
I don't think there's a WALK type as a return value, it's just a List of Routine or some such 18:12
speaking of which, it would be nice if all your return types said what they're Lists or Hashes "of"
might want to use --> List of Foo notation in that case
rather than the front type 18:13
18:13 justatheory left, justatheory joined
TimToady it seems strange to think of an attribute as RO 18:13
but maybe it's just an attribute descriptor? 18:14
the arguments for "can"-like calls should really be considered to be taking something more general than just a name, since we have to be able to qualify by argument types as well 18:16
18:17 tobeya joined
TimToady things like $object.can(&foo:(Int,Str,*)) and such 18:18
so it's a little odd to call it $identifier
18:20 meppl left
TimToady most of the .^ methods were also envisioned to have a corresponding method in Object 18:20
18:20 meppel-san is now known as meppl
TimToady so by default $object.can calls $object.^can, and .does calls .^does, etc 18:20
but that was just for convenience 18:21
it's possible we could enforce the ^
18:21 TJCRI left
TimToady in fact, the way to enforce the ^ is to put methods into Object that *refuse* to delegate to .HOW :) 18:21
but maybe we just delegate, and then that gives users of Object the right to override .can and .does in subclasses, and maybe that's a good thing 18:22
well, that's enough to start with. :) 18:23
18:27 TJCRI joined 18:30 jjore-w joined 18:34 njbartlett joined 18:37 rindolf joined 18:51 njbartlett left 18:52 fridim_ joined 18:57 manfred left 18:59 stevan_ left 19:04 rindolf left 19:05 stevan_ joined
cognominal_ what is the ref equivalent in Perl 6 19:06
how to get the class name of an object? 19:07
Tene $obj.WHAT iirc 19:09
pugs: my $s = 'foo'; say $s.WHAT 19:10
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[Strā¤]
19:12 Aankhen`` left
TimToady .WHAT gives you the protoobject, which stringifies to the class name if there is one 19:12
but there doesn't have to be...
and a normal class declaration basically does Foo::Bar ::= $anonclass.WHAT to attach it to a package name 19:13
ruoso TimToady, but... can we have both a submethod and a method of the same name? 19:14
I mean...
I'm trying to figure out what to do about BUILD
because Object's BUILD do something 19:15
cognominal_ thx Tene
and TimToady
ruoso it sets all the public attributes of the object that are in the *%initialize argument
TimToady submethods are essentially subs that just think they are methods 19:16
and expect to be called with an invocant
but their names live in sub space really
ruoso and also, if there's a BUILD method, the same BUILD will be called for every class in the hierarchy
while a submethod will only be invoked for one specific class
(unless I got it wrong...)
TimToady when a dispatcher calls them, they're really called as subs, not as methods 19:17
only Object defines a BUILD method generally, and mostly just to make sure the dispatch is handled well by default
I guess it can be a submethod in Object and still work that way though 19:18
ruoso my guess was that the call to BUILD is $class->?BUILD() instead of ->BUILD
which means that it is ok if a class don't define a custom BUILD 19:19
but...
there's the capture manipulation
BUILD can "consume" elements from the capture... 19:20
TimToady sorry, distracted cooking lunch...
ruoso (if I got it right)
cognominal_ what should print ./parrot languages/perl6/perl6.pbc -e 'print undef.WHAT'
ruoso rakudo: print undef.WHAT
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[Statement not terminated properly at line 1, near ".WHAT"ā¤current instr.: 'parrot;PGE::Util;die' pc 120 (runtime/parrot/library/PGE/Util.pir:82)ā¤called from Sub 'parrot;Perl6::Grammar;statementlist' pc 14911 (src/gen_grammar.pir:2402)ā¤called from Sub 'parrot;Perl6::Grammar;statement_block'
..pc 12098 (src/gen_grammar.pir:1396)ā¤called from S...
ruoso rakudo: print undef.WHAT();
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[Statement not terminated properly at line 1, near ".WHAT();"ā¤current instr.: 'parrot;PGE::Util;die' pc 120 (runtime/parrot/library/PGE/Util.pir:82)ā¤called from Sub 'parrot;Perl6::Grammar;statementlist' pc 14911 (src/gen_grammar.pir:2402)ā¤called from Sub
..'parrot;Perl6::Grammar;statement_block' pc 12098 (src/gen_grammar.pir:1396)ā¤called fro...
cognominal_ it dies on me 19:21
ruoso rakudo: print undef().WHAT();
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[Undef]
cognominal_ hum
why I should pos-parenthesize the undef? 19:22
rakudo: print undef().WHAT 19:23
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[Undef]
TimToady if you want a default BUILD submethod, where's the right place to store that?
ruoso Object
19:23 rindolf joined, funktio left
ruoso but that's not actually "default" 19:23
that will always be called
(which I thought to be the pourpose on submethods after all 19:24
TimToady seems like it's repr dependent
ruoso not exactly...
if I'm right, it'll use the REPR API
which makes it repr independant
as long as all repr implement the API
TimToady true 19:25
ruoso (and I really think the REPR API could be considered standard Perl 6... I really don't know if it can be done without it)
TimToady I guess whether you think of Object::BUILD as a method or as a submethod depends on whether you think of the BUILD calls as method calls or a sub calls
ruoso but isn't hiding it the point of submethods? 19:26
TimToady I was thinking of normal dispatch as @candidates = WALK; for @candidates { $_.() }
ruoso the only difference is that you would need to call 19:27
$class->BUILD($object: )
which would end up being
TimToady where as soon as you take a ref to a method, it basically turns into a sub as far as dereferencing goes
ruoso $class->can("BUILD")->call( \($object: ) )
cognominal_ rakudo: say (undef).WHAT 19:28
exp_evalbot OUTPUT[Undefā¤]
ruoso $object->BUILD would probably never dispatch anything...
TimToady but that's basically a double call of can, if each submethod is also dispatched as a method
ruoso you mean, to check for methods and for submethods... 19:29
so falling back to package::BUILD($object) would be natural 19:30
as every failed method dispatch failover to sub dispatch
so, there's no much point in submethds at all
they could simply be regular subs 19:31
TimToady they're submethods so that we allow ($obj:) in the sig
actually, I recently added the $object.*@candidates(@args); syntax 19:32
but that's also essentially treating @candidates as a list of sub refs, not names 19:33
ruoso so, during BUILDALL, it would invoke each BUILD by package with sub invocation, not by method of the object
19:33 rindolf left
TimToady note also that the call order is determined entirely by the WALK, and BUILD and DESTROY and normal dispatch are three different WALK orders 19:33
$object.*@candidates(@args); is really sub invocations, I'm saying 19:34
assuming @candidates doesn't contain method names
with names they'd be redispatched
$object.?$candidate(@args) is also a sub call if $candidate is a Routine 19:35
no real dispatch involved, except to make the call optional
ruoso I thought that it would always be a sub call in the $object.$anyhting... unless explicit $object."$anything" used...
TimToady er, yeah, what you said. :) 19:36
ruoso I was thinking it was deterministic by syntax
TimToady so never mind about that redispatch :)
ruoso ok
TimToady if you want that you have to do your own walk
I can't keep track of my own darn language, how will I expect other people to... :) 19:37
ruoso that makes me think... isn't an Iterator type missing?
TimToady List is the iterator type
ruoso List have index-based access
TimToady see "lazy"
ruoso Iterator must be able of not having index-based lookups
ruoso thinking of a BDB Btree without recno 19:38
TimToady a List will consist of a number of determined elements followed by a number of undetermined elements
ruoso TimToady, that's the point
TimToady if you use .[] it just moves some of them from undetermined to determined
ruoso and what if you have a circular list 19:39
you can't tell where it start
or a lookup in a bdb db
where you don't know how many elements there are before the one you got
TimToady prefix:<=> is the destructive way to read a list 19:40
or := to Array and use shift
ruoso but that implies index-based lookup
TimToady what of it?
ruoso sometimes I can't have index-based lookups 19:41
TimToady then you don't have an ordered type
ruoso you have
but you just don't know its cardinal position
it is ordered
you just can't count them
TimToady you don't have a well-ordered type
it's not transitive
ruoso you must navigate using .has_next, .next, .has_previous, .previous 19:42
TimToady fine, but Perl doesn't care about your circular linked list enough to implement it
and if you know what .next is, you can index from that position anyway 19:43
ruoso not in a berkeley db btree without recno
TimToady it's just a turing machine tape
Lists have a beginning in Perl 19:44
even if that's just notiationally the current position
*notionally
ruoso I see... and that's why I was arguing... a pure Iterator type have several interesting use cases...
TimToady .[3] do .next 3 times, peek, do .previous 3 times to get back (in the worst case) 19:45
fine, but that's what =$iterator is for
it's a scalar as far as Perl is concerned
ruoso sure...
It's just a matter of what's in the built-in api 19:46
for multi dispatch matters
TimToady note that @candidates can be as lazy as it likes 19:47
it doesn't have to go out to the end unless you ask it to do that
19:48 pmurias left
TimToady if one of the candidates says whatever "last METHOD" has turned into these days 19:48
it doesn't need to calculate the rest of the candidates
lastcall it is now
[particle] .onewhiskey() 19:49
TimToady maybe it's the last altar call :) 19:50
19:51 jferrero left
ruoso still think it's easier to implement MRO in terms of Iterator than in terms of List... 19:52
TimToady the main difference between List and Array is not their access interface; the main difference is that List presents an immutable interface to the order of the values, while an Array allows you to change out any elements you like
ruoso . o O ( Iterator is just a cursor to a List or an Array or whatever... ) 19:53
TimToady @candidates := WALK gives you the iterator
lambdabot Unknown command, try @list
ruoso thinking about self->NEXT::foo(), for instance... 19:54
TimToady that's spelled nextsame() these days 19:55
ruoso anyway...
TimToady and it has to work for mmd as well as single dispatch
anyway, making @candidates an object with potentially non-destructive readout allows you to cache the list 19:57
an iterator with destructive readout would force you to re-walk
ruoso an iterator usually is read-only 19:58
rw iterators are an exception
TimToady an iterator evaporates once you've used it in my lingo
ruoso not if it can forward and rewind
like a db cursor 19:59
TimToady but it's certainly not ro in the sense that nothing changes when you read it
ruoso it's an RO access to the list 20:00
the iterator itself is rw
but an iterator usually don't write to the list
TimToady look, whether you spell it "for @candidates" or ".*@candidates", there's an iterator there somewhere, but the user doesn't have to keep track of it 20:02
ruoso sure...
but again... I'm in a much lower level right now
I don't even have a parser atm
TimToady working on that... :) 20:03
ruoso :)
what I was arguing is that having Iterator as a built-in type
makes some things easier in the low-level
[particle] how 'bout a Role? 20:04
ruoso by type I really mean something that can be ~~'d to
but the point is that if getting an Iterator from a List is part of the List API 20:09
TimToady well, you have to implement laziness somehow; I don't much care how much the implementation of List shows through to the user
ruoso but it needs to be part of the standard API
so I can actually get an Iterator from a List 20:10
TimToady sure, but we actually try to hide the List api behind other apis in Perl, as far as mere mortals are concerned
ruoso we can't
TimToady "try to"
ruoso because anything can implement a list 20:11
we must have a very clear notion of what makes a List
TimToady we do, but the user doesn't :)
ruoso it must, if the user can implement a List on its pown
PerlJam Anything used in a List context is a List ;)
ruoso s/pown/own/
TimToady then that user is not a mere mortal 20:12
ruoso ah... ok...
ruoso realises that the problem is defining when a user is or not a highlander
TimToady indeed, that's what Perl is all about. but yes, certainly you have to be able to iterate a list on some level
ruoso that's what I call the List API 20:13
TimToady and in fact, it'll be very easy to generator iterators with ==> my $iter
[particle] maybe make it list rather than List?
ruoso [particle], that's not the point
the point is really being able to deal with unknown types 20:14
as long as they comply to some defined APIs 20:15
TimToady an iterator must store its state somewhere external to the list, because a list must support multiple iterators simultaneously
ruoso is saying he doesn't want to access the list from the iterator using .[], and that's fine 20:16
ruoso yep
[particle] don't we have closures?
TimToady what mean "we", white man?
[particle] does smop have closures at this level
ruoso smop doesn't have lexical scopes yet 20:18
TimToady closures are useful for generating more of the underlying list, but I don't see how that applies to iterators...
ruoso indeed....
20:18 Helios_ joined
ruoso an iterator to a regular list would hold a simple int pointing to some point of the list 20:18
TimToady but then you're assuming a .[] api again
or a .next.next.next.prev.prev.prev api :) 20:19
20:19 sri_work left
ruoso which is what I would like to use in the low-level 20:19
ops... I've just understood what you said... 20:20
TimToady well, the really low-level api just uses scalar refs that point to subs, and doesn't care how it gets fed those...
ruoso the thing is that most of the time I won't have a regular list
most of the time I'll use the list API to opaque data structures 20:21
in the low-level
TimToady there's no list at all in $object.?$subref()
so you're really talking about the not-quite-lowest level 20:22
[particle] ? meaning submethod? /me rechecks s12
ruoso but $obj.^!isa returns a non-regular list 20:23
TimToady meaning call $subref($object: ) optionally
[particle] ah, gotcha.
TimToady calling through a reference erases the distinction between subs and methods
ruoso by non-regular list I mean a opaque object that implements the list api
that would probably return a non-regular-list-iterator when asked for an iterator 20:24
and navigating with next and previous is probably more efficient than resolving the index of each lookup 20:25
for that opaque object
or it certainly is if the access is always sequential
[particle] btw i was thinking of generators when i mentioned closures, you're right, doesn't apply
ruoso like during MRO
TimToady sure, and when the user writes his own dispatcher with $object.*@candidates, the .* dispatcher will be iterating through the array/list/whatever 20:26
ruoso exactly...
can I get my pony^Witerator type now? 20:27
TimToady in fact, I suppose $object.*$iterator also falls out of that, which is what you're trying to get me to understand
never said you couldn't :)
ruoso one important thing that I think is not yet clear... 20:28
is that what we call Perl 6 will also be defined by what the built-in APIs are
and i think these should be considered specifications 20:29
for instance...
I'm considering that there is a native capture type
now there are two options... or the native capture becomes part of the spec, or I have to forget about it... otherwise the SMOP Perl 6 won't be compatible with the Rakudo Perl 6 20:30
TimToady to the extent that those apis are the only reasonably way to do things, we can certainly consider speccing them. but that's more something for various implementations to negotiate
I try not to design too far out ahead of my own understanding.
[particle] ok, that's scary. 20:31
you already understand *a lot* :)
ruoso my point is... if we agree on an Iterator type... it must get to the specs
as to make sure code from different implementations can interoperate
[particle] parrot's Iterator PMC doesn't have a 'previous' (most iterator implementations i know don't.) 20:32
TimToady what, you don't back up lines with >STDIN< ???
ruoso still wonders if the .^!foo api shouldn't get to the spec also...
[particle], Iterator is really just an API... as every non-native built-in type 20:33
we could consider that Iterator can only go forward
TimToady that would be the base role
a two-way iterator would add in .previous
ruoso exactly 20:34
and a rw iterator would include .add, .remove and .update
20:35 hanekomu joined
ruoso one important realisation I had in SMOP is that the only objects you actually know are the native ones... everything else is just Design by Contract... even for the built-in types... 20:35
an Int is anything that says true to .does(Int) 20:36
it can even have a different representation
TimToady I don't think that's the standard definition of DbC, but whatever
ruoso [particle], btw... how do you plan to support alternative representations in rakudo? 20:37
[particle] i haven't really considered it yet.
ruoso hmmm...
20:37 DarkWolf84 joined
ruoso I'd suggest you considering it early... 20:37
[particle] :)
TimToady PMCs are parrot's God Object :P
[particle] right, we can always create another pmc. 20:38
but, i'm sure there are some better than others,
and parrot's pmc model is under refactoring atm
soon we'll have role-composition for pmcs.
i have a feeling that will impact rakudo's model. so, i wait. 20:39
ruoso I mean... can you have a simple reference to a Glib object in a PMC? and delegate the object representation management to Glib?
[particle] pmc's encapsulate behavior behind the VTABLE api
so, yes. 20:40
ruoso ok... so you probably won't have much trouble
but one thing you must remember is that you must be able to do: 20:42
my $foo = Int.CREATE(:repr<Glib>); my $bar = Int.bless($foo);
so the object initialization code must not depend on a single representation 20:43
that's exactly the point I'm stressing in the last week (what I'm calling the SMOP OO API)
20:44 Psyche^ joined
ruoso and that probably means that the repr api should be standard 20:44
[particle] well, we're not quite there yet, but that's partially because there's no way (in the spec) to query the object's representation afaik
ruoso and that would make a single core lib implementation that could be shared by rakudo and smop
[particle] ...that's why you have .^!
20:45 zamolxes joined
ruoso yep... and the only thing that makes it SMOP specific right now is the fact that it's not in spec 20:45
[particle] it's okay to be ahead of the spec. 20:46
TimToady always catches up :)
note that '{*}' and '#= foo' still isn't specced
ruoso it would be amazing if smop and rakudo shared the built-in lib 20:47
PerlJam Conventions shouldn't be specced so much :)
ruoso [particle], did you see smop/src-s1p/Object.pm 20:50
ruoso home &
[particle] looking now
20:51 buchetc joined
ruoso it's outdated considering the last changes I made to the REPR api 20:51
but the point is that it should probably be the same code that rakudo is supposed to run...
[particle] ah, yes, looking at this reminded me that i need to add flattening to rakudo 20:52
ruoso anyway...
home &
seeya
20:53 silug joined 20:55 njbartlett joined
pugs_svn r19890 | buchetc++ | use contend to avoid race condition 20:55
20:59 Patterner left, Psyche^ is now known as Patterner 21:01 blindfish left, thoughtpolice joined 21:21 ludan joined
ludan hi 21:22
TimToady howdy
21:23 Helios_ is now known as Helios 21:40 sleskey joined
cognominal_ S4 mentions C<contend> but I can't see anywere else. What is it? 21:49
21:51 pbuetow left
cognominal_ I see it in the rakudo grammar.pg too 21:51
21:55 hanekomu left, thepler_ left
buchetc cognominal_: Formely it was called 'atomically', I think. I currently understand it as a kind of locking mechanism 21:55
21:56 thepler joined
cognominal_ ok, makes sense 21:58
ho macosx 10.5.2 update and still no ps preview :(
allbery_b not surprising, word I hear is 10.5.2 is all about Time Machine / Time Capsule 22:01
buchetc cognominal_: contend should be documented in S17.
cognominal_ ha, I searched in dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/, no S17 there 22:02
lambdabot Title: Perl6 Architecture - perl6
22:02 ruoso left, jhorwitz left 22:03 Jamtech joined
buchetc try svn.openfoundry.org/pugs/docs/Perl6...rency.pod; I don't know why it's hidden 22:04
cognominal_ well, in fact, right now, I have no special interest in it. Just surprised to see mentionned only once in the synopses 22:06
22:10 jferrero joined 22:12 iblechbot left 22:14 psapo left 22:15 psapo joined 22:16 sleskey left 22:19 monomorph left 22:29 Auzon joined 22:32 peeps[work] joined 22:34 justatheory left 22:35 justatheory joined 22:36 Zygo left 22:37 Zygo joined, Limbic_Region joined 22:39 Zygo left 22:40 Zygo joined 22:42 buchetc left 22:47 cmarcelo left 22:53 TJCRI left 22:55 Limbic_Region left 22:59 Jamtech left 23:06 ruoso joined 23:07 wknight-away joined, peeps[work] left 23:10 rdice left 23:21 Zygo left, Zygo joined 23:22 Limbic_Region joined 23:33 ebassi left 23:36 ludan left 23:38 jferrero left 23:40 Jedai left, ruoso left 23:47 ruoso joined 23:48 eternaleye left, zamolxes left 23:55 Zygo left 23:56 Zygo joined 23:58 Schwern joined 23:59 PerlJam left, Zygo left

Powered by Cro and the RakuĀ® Programming Language.

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

Thank you!