svn switch --relocate svn.openfoundry.org/pugs svn.pugscode.org/pugs/ | run.pugscode.org | spec.pugscode.org | paste: sial.org/pbot/perl6 | pugs.blogs.com
Set by avar on 16 November 2006.
00:08 turrepurre joined 00:17 neonse left 00:23 avar joined 00:41 hexmode joined 00:43 diakopter joined 01:41 kanru joined 02:02 buetow joined 02:16 xinming joined 02:18 nipotaway is now known as nipotan 02:19 bonesss joined 02:27 nipra joined 02:29 nipra is now known as nipra_ 02:41 dmq joined 02:47 mjk joined 02:50 mjk joined 02:54 xinming joined 02:59 xinming joined 03:32 xinming joined
pasteling "beppu_" at 72.134.38.155 pasted "svk sync problem" (5 lines, 210B) at sial.org/pbot/22036 03:37
beppu_ I thought I'd give svk another try, but when I tried to svk sync the pugs svn repository, I get the error message I posted at revision 12102. 03:38
clkao upgrade your svn::mirror
beppu_ I'll try that.
clkao or upgrade to svk 2.0 ;)
beppu_ one step at a time. ;) 03:39
looks like it's working. Thanks. clkao. 03:43
03:44 xinming joined 03:55 xinming joined 04:05 luqui joined 04:22 xinming joined 04:27 xinming_ joined 04:40 luqui joined 04:49 xinming__ joined 04:57 rizen joined 04:59 xinming joined 05:02 kanru joined 05:07 xinming joined 05:21 xinming_ joined 05:26 imperator joined 05:28 nipra joined 05:32 baest_ joined 05:38 xinming joined 05:44 xinming joined 05:50 xinming joined 05:58 Dr_Pi joined 06:02 drbean left 06:04 Dr_Pi_ joined 06:12 BooK joined 06:15 baest_ is now known as baest 06:30 xinming joined 06:42 xinming joined 06:53 RHainsworth joined 06:54 RHainsworth left 07:21 ayrnieu joined 07:24 araujo joined 07:31 pstickne joined
pstickne hello 07:31
wolverian welcome! 07:33
it's a bit quiet now as our project lead (audreyt) has been away for a while, but I hope it'll pick up again soon. :) until then, see topic, have fun, and ask if you have any questions.
pstickne in Perl6 are classes objects or are they still tied to a namespace? 07:34
integral Yes.
wolverian namespaces are objects too...
see the relevant synopses on spec.pugscode.org
pstickne I guess a better question; are classes definitions or are they executable in their own notion of 'self'? 07:35
wolverian, heh
wolverian those are still not quite exclusive.. :)
pstickne uhh.
wolverian but yes, everything is an object, and classes are pseudoprototypical.
see S12 for the OO stuff.
pstickne ooh.
And it's just a message-based OO system? 07:36
wolverian the synopsis explains it better than I do! really!
:)
pstickne okay, okay :P
wolverian you'll probably have questions even after reading it
those are the ones you should ask :)
TimToady Whenever you say "it's just a" about some aspect of Perl 6, it's usually true that you can view it that way, and usually false that it really is "just a". 07:38
07:39 ruz_ joined 07:59 canine_kouji joined 08:04 dolmans joined 08:16 iblechbot joined 08:28 Psyche^ joined 08:37 xinming joined 08:38 devogon joined 08:44 Psyche^ is now known as Patterner
luqui ?eval (10**309)**2 09:04
evalbot_r14941 Inf
luqui ?eval (10**309)*(10**309)
evalbot_r14941 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
luqui that doesn't seem like reasonable behavior
(I think the first one is wrong)
canine_kouji scary 09:06
09:06 canine_kouji left
pstickne The 2nd doesn't seem correct either. 09:15
Ohh, I guess eval-bot truncation.
gaal > (10**309)**2 09:17
lambdabot Infinity 09:18
gaal > (10**309)*(10**309)
lambdabot Infinity
luqui > (10^309)^2
lambdabot 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000...
gaal @type (^)
@type (**)
lambdabot forall a b. (Integral b, Num a) => a -> b -> a
forall a. (Floating a) => a -> a -> a
wolverian @type (10**309)**2 09:19
lambdabot forall a. (Floating a) => a
wolverian I suppose it defaults to a finite one. :)
luqui right. I think perl was smart not to have a **, ^, and ^^
but it makes these semantics a little tricky
09:20 kattana_ joined 09:22 b_jonas joined
wolverian toInteger is a bit long too.. 09:24
on that note, I don't think I've ever needed it.
luqui ?eval ((10/1)**(309/1))**(2/1)
evalbot_r14941 Inf 09:25
luqui okay good
whew
wolverian that's good? :)
luqui well, no
but it's different on my local copy
so I was determining whether it was my change that did it
The exponential operator definitely needs some work 09:26
it stringifies the number and then sees if it ends in ".0" to determine if it is an integer
but I need to clarify the semantics
wolverian heh
I compiled ghc 6.6 yesterday, ran out of space, then realised the development version of ubuntu I have already has ghc 6.6 09:27
wolverian checkouts pugs
luqui, shouldn't that actually be done by the (hypothetical) type inferencer? given an appopriate (mmd) signature for the operator, of course.. 09:28
luqui it doesn't work for Haskell
wolverian good point. 09:29
gaal haskell has a 'default' keyword for this 09:30
09:30 xinming joined
gaal regarding pugs, well once we finally complete the transition to newVal, you wouldn't need to stringify the operand to tell if it's a float 09:30
luqui you don't have to right now either 09:31
fromIntegral (floor x) == x 09:32
but the test suite didn't like that one very much
09:35 xinming_ joined
gaal quirk-compat with p5? 09:36
09:42 elmex joined 09:52 ofer0 joined 09:53 penk joined 10:27 chris2 joined 10:36 xinming joined 10:42 wilx` joined 10:53 wilx` is now known as wilx 11:05 nipra joined 11:06 xinming joined 11:16 lovecoder joined 11:22 buetow joined 11:24 BooK_ joined 11:41 lovecoder left 11:45 lovec0der joined 11:49 xinming joined 12:45 nipotan is now known as nipotaway 13:00 kanru joined 13:22 bonesss joined
b_jonas would you mind if I asked a few more beginner perl6 questions? 13:31
When does an Array flatten in list context? Always? Or only when it comes from an @variable? 13:32
13:43 ruz joined
gaal not an authoritative answer, but "always in list context" makes way more sense to em 13:43
wolverian right. put it in a Capture otherwise. 13:44
(hmm.. no feature <flatten>;) 13:45
13:54 b_jonas joined 14:11 weinig|bbl is now known as weinig 14:12 turrepurre joined
b_jonas (if anyone answered my Array question, please repeat it because I lost the irc) 14:16
wolverian b_jonas, colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/...-12-29,Fri :) 14:20
lambdabot Title: #perl6 2006-12-29,Fri, tinyurl.com/y59fnf
buubot xrl.us/t26s
lambdabot Title: #perl6 2006-12-29,Fri
wolverian eek
14:36 nipra_ is now known as nipra, penk joined 14:37 weinig joined
b_jonas wolverian: thanks 14:38
that's wierd. so how do you make one not flatten? such as if you want to build an array of arrays like @aoa = (@a1, @a2); 14:39
I know that the | operator flattens explicitly 14:41
ah wait 14:42
S03 says
"In list context, a Scalar holding an Array object does not flatten."
so it's not the silgil what counts but the container
I was reading the wrong S (it's not always easy to know which one to read)
wolverian b_jonas, yeah, that's a problem (which spec to read). the specs aren't really in a Q&A format. 14:44
(which makes sense, since they're specs. but that sort of docs would be nice too.) 14:45
b_jonas I'd like a reference docs format, not a Q&A format docs. 14:47
[particle] we have a wiki
b_jonas Just like the reference docs perldocs.
In perl5 I mean.
wolverian perldocs are a bit bloated too, nowadays.. 14:49
b_jonas yes I know
wolverian but, anyway. yeah, the wiki is a good idea.
b_jonas they don't explain some things about perl5.
Or thy don't explain them the way I'd like. 14:50
wolverian I think the more you try to explain perl5 the farther you push it.
(from you)
[particle] even if you just create a wishlist on the wiki, and list that item with a good description, it'd help
wolverian uncertainty principle, of sorts..
b_jonas I can understand. I'm lazy to write good docs too. 14:51
(and it's still much better than the ruby docs, though the readable ruby source sort of compensates that) 14:53
(the ruby standard library is documented pretty well, but the language itself isn't) 14:54
[particle] ruby is also *very* young
b_jonas sure 14:56
but perl1 was already well documented
:) 14:57
ruby isn't that young now btw
[particle] well, perl can vote
b_jonas ruby is more than 10 years old now 14:58
I can't see how these perl6 context variables are better than plain temp/local variables. 15:20
15:32 vel joined
allbery_b I thought context vars were to deal with various kinds of magic, e.g. the variables set by doing matches. perl5 does the same thing but there's no structure to it. 15:47
b_jonas I think the of-type of multi functions is matched with the context 15:52
and most operators will be of-typed
but even in a normal function, I guess the last expression and the argument to return is evaluated in that context 15:53
the differenct is, perl6 will have a plethora of contexts, not just 3 as perl5 did
wolverian perl5 has lots of contexts too 15:54
b_jonas not really
I mean, they are used only in a few places
wolverian (perldoc overload) 15:55
yeah, but perl5 doesn't have a real type system either :)
b_jonas hmm, I sort of see what you mean
wolverian perl5's "context" is a very vague concept. in perl6 it's just type inference (or at least, can be viewed as such) 15:56
or MMD if you like to think of it that way 15:57
(vague from a theoretical viewpoint)
b_jonas yeah
allbery_b perhaps the more key point is that in perl5 it was all ad hoc and could pop up in unexpected circumstances, but in perl6 it's been regularized. doesn't necessarily mean it will be used, just that things are cleaner in perl6 16:12
(see also: magic handling of $a and $b with sort)
16:24 Dr_Pi joined 16:29 spoop joined
b_jonas If I have a plain array such as 'my @x; @x[0] = "foo";' then is the element of the array a Scalar or just a Str? In general, can an array hold various capitalized types as elements or it can only be homogenous? 16:32
allbery_b IIRC the container type is Scalar and the value type is Str. a Scalar container can hold any scalar, or a reference to a different container type 16:41
unless you specifically tell it otherwise, e.g.. my @x is Str; 16:42
or something like that
[particle] of Str iirc 16:43
allbery_b yeh, was just checking that because it looked not quite right
or my Str @x; 16:44
(per S09)
16:50 hexmode joined
[particle] really? that creates an array of Str? 16:51
hrm, so it seems 16:53
allbery_b S09 implied it. might be leftover syntax like TimToady found the other day
[particle] according to S02, i think that's right. 16:54
the type constraint is on the value in my Str @x
there are also container constraints, like my @x is MyArray
allbery_b yeh 16:58
17:01 nipra joined 17:03 Dr_Pi_ joined 17:18 diotalevi joined 17:22 BooK joined 17:24 araujo joined
diotalevi When I say my $x; any( $x ), why do I get the VUndef in VJunc any( VUndef )? I expected to see $x there. 17:41
allbery_b presumably it's using the value of $x, which (being uninitialized) is undef 17:42
17:43 RHainsworth joined
allbery_b (whether it's supposed to be lazy or not is a question for the experts...) 17:43
[particle] hint: the experts are lazy, too 17:44
diotalevi Ok, but any(\$x) also leaves me with VUndef. Am I taking a reference the wrong way?
17:44 RHainsworth left
[particle] reference? 17:49
what are you trying to get?
s/get/do/
17:53 polettix joined, zgh joined
diotalevi Globally, I'm trying to think about mapping prolog or other logic programming onto Perl 6. Locally, I'm trying to curry some computation into a junction and I think it has to be lazy because I'm not going to supply some of the data needed for the computation til later. I want to make the junction now and have it know to refer back to $x which I'm not providing now but promise to before I ask the junction to run. 17:55
?eval my $x; my $y = any( $x ); $x = 1; $y == 1; 17:56
evalbot_r14941 (Bool::False)
diotalevi ?eval my $x; my $y = any( \ $x ); $x = 1; $y == 1;
evalbot_r14941 (Bool::False)
[particle] ?eval my $x; my $y = list any($x); $x = 1; $y == 1; 17:59
evalbot_r14941 (Bool::False)
diotalevi ?eval my $x; my $y = any( ->{$x} ); $x = 1; $y == 1 # so capture $x instead
evalbot_r14941 (*** Cannot cast from VCode (MkCode {isMulti = False, subName = "<anon>", subType = SubPointy, subEnv = Just (MkEnv {envContext = CxtSlurpy (mkType "Any"), envLValue = False, envLexical = MkPad (padToList [("$x",[(<ref:0xb68e3ec0>,<ref:0xb68e3eb8>)]),("$_",[(<ref:0xb6827214>,<ref:0xb682720c>)]),("$?1",[(<ref:0xb68e6028>,<ref:0xb68e6020>)]),("$__evalbot_print",[(<ref:0xb6672e94>,<ref:0xb6672e8c>)]),("$y",[(<ref:0xb68e3ed0>,<ref:0xb68e3ec8>)])]), en
allbery_b (gesundheit :p)
[particle] evalbot go boom
diotalevi ?eval my $x; my $y = any( ->{$x} ); $x = 1; $y->() == 1
evalbot_r14941 Error: ā¤Unexpected "->()"ā¤expecting "::", term postfix or operator
diotalevi ?eval my $x; my $y = any( ->{$x} ); $x = 1; $y == ->{$x} 18:00
evalbot_r14941 (*** Cannot cast from VCode (MkCode {isMulti = False, subName = "<anon>", subType = SubPointy, subEnv = Just (MkEnv {envContext = CxtSlurpy (mkType "Any"), envLValue = False, envLexical = MkPad (padToList [("$x",[(<ref:0xb683d19c>,<ref:0xb683d194>)]),("$_",[(<ref:0xb672bca0>,<ref:0xb672bc98>)]),("$?1",[(<ref:0xb67d38c4>,<ref:0xb67d38bc>)]),("$__evalbot_print",[(<ref:0xb6672a40>,<ref:0xb6672a38>)]),("$y",[(<ref:0xb683d1ac>,<ref:0xb683d1a4>)])]), en
diotalevi So.
allbery_b ?eval my $x; my $y = any( ->{$x} ); $x = 1; $y() == 1
evalbot_r14941 Error: Cannot cast from VJunc any(VCode (MkCode {isMulti = False, subName = "<anon>", subType = SubPointy, subEnv = Just (MkEnv {envContext = CxtSlurpy (mkType "Any"), envLValue = False, envLexical = MkPad (padToList [("$x",[(<ref:0xb67d3714>,<ref:0xb67d370c>)]),("$_",[(<ref:0xb672a2c0>,<ref:0xb672a2b8>)]),("$?1",[(<ref:0xb67d8ea8>,<ref:0xb67d8ea0>)]),("$__evalbot_print",[(<ref:0xb6571908>,<ref:0xb6571900>)]),("$y",[(<ref:0xb67d3724>,<ref:0xb67d37
allbery_b oh well
diotalevi Oh that's an interesting error. 18:01
[particle] ?eval my $x; my $y = any(list($x)); $x = 1; $y == 1;
evalbot_r14941 (Bool::False) 18:02
b_jonas of Str? just because I assigned a single Str element? 18:06
that sounds strange to me
but what I'd like to know not the declarations but whether it really contains scalars or not 18:07
diotalevi ?eval my $x; sub{$x} eqv sub{$x} # returns false but probably shouldn't?
evalbot_r14941 Bool::False
b_jonas for example, whether I can take a reference to one element of the array and assign to that such that it modifies the contents of the array, like in perl5
[particle] b_jonas: it's not type constrained unless specified during declaration 18:08
it == the variable (container)
allbery_b diotalevy: it's not clear to me that comparing two closures for equivalence is sensible 18:10
b_jonas the problem could be in my question
diotalevi It's perfectly sensible. They are the same data, they should be able to be compared for equivalence.
?eval [1..4] eqv [1..4] # those are two different containers of equivalent value. 18:12
evalbot_r14941 Bool::True
allbery_b they should be identical in that particular case. but consider: my $x; my $a = sub { $x }; sub g { sub { $x } }; $a eqv g()
[particle] ?eval any(1) == 1
evalbot_r14941 (Bool::True) 18:13
allbery_b potentially they're not because closures can capture variables form their context
diotalevi that's just a recursive check then, allbery_b. You now test the lexical environment for equivalence.
allbery_b better example: my ($x, $y); my $a = sub { ($x, $y) }; sub g { my $y; sub { ($x, $y) } }; $a eqv g() 18:14
18:14 BooK joined
allbery_b $y is different in both cases. and checking contexts can become difficult (and potentially exponential) as the code becomes more complex 18:14
lumi Halting problem? 18:15
allbery_b I could imagine it if there's something defined circularly in some context
b_jonas I think the equalty check for closures should just be address equalty. 18:17
allbery_b I'm more worried about "unreasonably expensive"
18:17 wilx left
allbery_b ==b_jonas 18:17
diotalevi So what happens in scheme or other lisps when I say (equal (lambda () 1) (lambda () 1))?
b_jonas diotalevi: scheme allows either output there
diotalevi b_jonas: there's a different operator for identity/address equality. 18:18
b_jonas yes, but for procedures they're the same
I mean in scheme
allbery_b depends on whether it recognizes that they have the same context and unifies them, I suspect
b_jonas I think it's basically intended to be address equalty but even in perl5 some closures may be optimized not to be recreated eg when none of the bound variables have changed 18:19
allbery_b (CSE, which only works in the same expression)
b_jonas like, sub f { sub {} } will always return the same sub as an optimization
diotalevi See, referencing further above if I have any(sub{$x}) then I'd like to be able to compare whether I have sub{$x}, sub{$y}, sub{wow. something loony here.}, sub {whatever}. 18:21
So some kind of equality comparison becomes important to me pretty quickly.
eqv seemed like a pretty obvious choice. 18:22
b_jonas so you want eqv to do a deep comparision on the subs? 18:25
diotalevi Yes.
Or some other operator probably named 'equal'.
b_jonas and, for example, if currently $a eqv $b, then sub { $a} would be eqv to sub { $b } 18:26
diotalevi eqv has a nicer name though since equivalent is closer.
yes, likely b_jonas. If eqv is defined as doing a snapshot of "now" then the values stored in the lexical environments are being compared. 18:27
So yes, if $a eqv $b then also sub { $a } eqv sub { $b }. 18:28
b_jonas you have to take care with the names because, for some stupid reason, ruby messed them up and defined equal? as equal identity
diotalevi Ruby matters?
b_jonas no
just like with $/
diotalevi Their bug is their bug. They can fix it.
b_jonas perl6 calls the regexp match variable $/, just to be different. ($~ in ruby) 18:29
$/ will also confuse all the perl5ers as well, so it's a very bad name imo. 18:32
diotalevi It's not a *bad* name, it's just dissonant with what I already know. I can already guess a nice reason for $/ which makes it easy to remember and describe: The '/' is named after the '/' in /.../. 18:34
Almost no one used the regexp variables in perl 5: @- and @+. 18:36
b_jonas and the $~ is named after the =~ with which you match regexps
as for @- and @+, they're currently not used much because they were new in 5.8 I think
diotalevi they're new in 5.6.0, b_jonas. 18:37
Or perhaps farther back. 18:38
b_jonas maybe
diotalevi uses those in 5.6.
b_jonas indeed, it's in 5.6.1 18:39
diotalevi you found the perldelta entry?
b_jonas no, just tried an 5.6.1
and 5.6.1 I had on some machine
diotalevi So anyway, I don't see it in the spec that my($x,$y);sub{$x} eqv sub{$y} isn't supposed to work so I'm making it a test. 18:42
I mean, it does seem pretty obvious (to me). 18:44
b_jonas It doesn't to me because I think the insides of closures should usually be treated opaqe. 18:49
TimToady We need to see a use case.
my gut feeling is that sub{$x} and sub{$y} cannot be eqv unless $x and $y are aliases, regardless of their values. 18:50
eqv is comparing serializations, and I don't think bindings necessarily serialize the value of what they happen to bind to if those bindings are external. 18:53
diotalevi thinks the insides of closures are data and can't be opaque.
TimToady thinks opacity is a red herring 18:54
diotalevi So bindings are just references to more data and that problem is well within eqv's grasp.
TimToady only if serialization would serialize the referenced data. 18:55
b_jonas serialization? [\@a, \@a] and [\@b, \@a] serialize differently but they should be eqv, shouldn't they?
TimToady so it's a question of ownership, which I'll admit is complex 18:56
why would those be eqv?
diotalevi So what is this "serialization" thing here? Why is the data being serialized at all? When you say "serialization" you mean it's getting flattened into a string and compared that way?
b_jonas because both are two-element arrays and their respective arrays are eqv 18:57
18:57 Odin-LAP joined
TimToady eqv is defined in terms of "if it were serialized" 18:57
b_jonas hmm
TimToady and just as there are various ways to serialize
there are various ways to compute eqv.
eqv takes optional arguments specifying that. 18:58
b_jonas uh
TimToady just as cmp does
b_jonas ok
TimToady we have to pick a default, but that's all it is--a default.
so I'd like to see a use case for picking any particular default. 18:59
diotalevi The text next to eqv in the spec says it makes a "canonical representation" of it's operands and uses === on those. That's the serialization?
TimToady it's attempting to say the same thing 19:00
but it's still a subjunctive "if I *were* to canonicalize this..." 19:01
the eqv and cmp don't actually have to do the canonicalization.
just produce results consistent with it.
basically comes down to that you have to compare the bits in the same order that a canonicalizer would visit. 19:02
but you can short circuit
probably we could go as far as to make different defaults in different lexical scopes via pragma 19:03
diotalevi Ok. Is code as an operand to eqv even defined then? I don't know what it's even doing differently than === in this case.
TimToady === doesn't have variants like eqv does 19:04
=== always compares identity, which for value types is the value
but for mutable types is always the address
19:04 neonse joined
TimToady if you can serialize a closure, you can eqv it. 19:05
diotalevi So I don't see why a closure has to be serialized. Can't a closure or any other code be looked at as plain old data? you know, lisp? 19:06
Even Perl 5 had that much.
allbery_b er? sub {} is an opaque coderef in perl5 19:07
diotalevi No it isn't, allbery_b. B::*.
TimToady that is *one* serialization method 19:08
see also YAML
(which happens to attempt to use B::* underneath, iirc)
allbery_b tends to think of B::* as grotting around in internals one really isn't supposed to mess with 19:09
TimToady too
diotalevi allbery_b: there's a trick to it. You just have to declare that you're supposed to be there.
allbery_b and, well, if you want Scheme, perhaps you should use Scheme.
allbery_b can do regexp foo in C, that doesn't mean C is really appropriate for it 19:10
diotalevi You tend to also expect a more violently mutable world then too...
were I in C and wanting to use a regexp, I'd include a library for that like pcre, boost if I was lucky to be in C++ or "just" perl. 19:12
allbery_b I have libraries. it's still horribly clunky compared to Perl 19:13
likewise, what you're trying to do is clunky and "unnatural" in Perl 19:14
diotalevi Anyhow, i've gotten very used to thinking of perl as a very ugly lisp and I'd be... I dunno. Inconsolable or something like that if Perl 6 were less than Perl 5 in that regard. Extreme introspection is a wonderful thing and a large part of why I love perl 5. 19:15
That's purely about my feeling though.
allbery_b I'd be surprised if there weren't some hack like B::* for perl6. (in fact, I think there is; the ugs prelude is serialized with YAML) 19:16
er, pugs
but for it to be the default is questionable at best 19:17
diotalevi Well no.. most code doesn't need that kind of feature. Some does. 19:18
allbery_b ?eval (sub {}).yaml
evalbot_r14941 "--- sub \{Syn \"block\" \{Noop}}\n"
allbery_b ?eval my $x; (sub { $x }).yaml 19:19
evalbot_r14941 "--- sub \{Syn \"block\" \{Var \"\$x\"}}\n"
allbery_b good enough for you?
hm. come to think of it... 19:20
diotalevi Uh... sure.
allbery_b ?eval my $x; (sub { $x }).perl
evalbot_r14941 "sub \{Syn \"block\" \{Var \"\$x\"}}"
allbery_b heh
19:33 araujo joined 19:34 hugues23 joined
diotalevi &?BLOCK(...) rocks. Kinda ugly though. 19:38
araujo ugliness is just other term for beauty
PerlJam no, ugliness is ugliness. It's just that everyone has their own personal threshhold for such things. 19:42
TimToady we make some thing ugly on purpose to discourage people from using htem. 19:48
*them
diotalevi I was thinking that &?BLOCK is deliberately ugly to make it stand out especially since it's important as "unusual" flow control.
araujo No, ugliness is beauty. i can prove you that PerlJam 19:49
PerlJam araujo: go for it! :-)
araujo PerlJam, You only say something is ugly when you know something 'more' beauty than it. 19:51
:-)
TimToady in other words, an ugly something has beauty, it's just negative. :) 19:52
araujo yeah :-) 19:53
araujo always wins beer beats with this :-) 19:57
argh, bet*
TimToady lunch & 19:59
araujo enjoy TimToady
20:08 weinig is now known as weinig|bbl 20:14 weinig|bbl is now known as weinig
b_jonas diotalevi: I don't think procedures of something that are just a fancy list in scheme either 20:25
(clarify) diotalevi: I don't think of procedures as just a fancy list in scheme either 20:26
I think they're an opaque structure.
on the other hand, perl doesn't usually have opaque structures, it's so dynamic it always provides a way to circumvent protection 20:27
so maybe your view is better suited for perl6
TimToady one could argue that eqv should tell you whether two routines "desugar" to the same AST. 20:30
that is, they're eqv if they have the same semantics 20:31
though as with other forms of eqv, it depends on how good your canonicalization is. 20:32
for instance, Perl 5 has an optimization that removes unneeded block scopes.
but if that optimization were missing, it would change the canonicalizatoin 20:33
or the C14n for those of us who can't type. :)
[particle] or C\d+n for those of us who can't spell ;) 20:35
TimToady just as two hashes may or may not be eqv depending on whether the c14n sorts the entries.
jrockway heh, "can<M-/>" 20:37
TimToady of course, %a eqv %b is unlikely to perform two sorts. 20:39
first it looks to see if the number of keys are the same. 20:40
then it probably just looks up all the keys of %a in %b.
and quits on the first mismatch
(also comparing values at the same time) 20:41
and if there's any way to guess which keys are likely to falsify earlier, it should do those first. :)
b_jonas g'night 20:48
diotalevi TimToady: I didn't see where in the synopsis that the "alternate" version of eqv is spec'd. 20:51
?eval *eqv( 1, 1 ) # isn't the eqv infix operator. 20:52
evalbot_r14941 Bool::False
TimToady look for the bit in S03 that starts "If that's not enough flexibility" 20:58
diotalevi Well yes, I tried that.
Maybe it's just that Pugs didn't have eqv() yet that I was confused. 20:59
?eval eqv( 1, 1 ) # no compatible subroutine found 21:01
evalbot_r14941 Error: No compatible subroutine found: "&eqv"
TimToady Pugs isn't the definition of Perl 6. :)
diotalevi Right... but it looks like it occasionally.
21:06 bonsai joined 21:08 elmex joined 21:40 perlDreamer joined
perlDreamer I was wondering why all the perl6 efforts (pugs, parrot and p6-on-p5) don't use a centralized test suite instead of each having their own? 21:44
There would be less duplication of effort and it would help guarantee compliance to the synopses. 21:46
[particle] we haven't gotten there yet 21:47
perlDreamer not enough tuits?
[particle] perl6 on parrot is *almost* ready to use Test.pm, which is written in perl6
...and in the pugs repo
once we can 'use Test'; we can run the pugs test suite 21:48
there will always be tests specific to each virtual machine 21:49
so, parrot has its own suite for that, as does perl5 and haskell
perlDreamer sure, "quirks" testing 21:50
[particle] no, compiler/vm testing
not perl6 compiler
but what's beneath it
perl6 is a high level language. we're working toward a common test suite for perl6. 21:51
but it's not possible to share a test suite for what's under the covers (the virtual machine)
the virtual machine is where io/events/threading/exceptions/etc are implemented 21:53
perlDreamer What is the right way for a newbie to get involved in the common test suite for perl6?
[particle] get a pugs commit bit
(that's easy)
then start writing tests, and committing them :) 21:54
perlDreamer and will the parrot team be using the pugs test suite?
allbery_b if audrey were around she would have already offered you one just for showing up :)
[particle] i'll offer you one now
perlDreamer okay, thank you! 21:55
[particle] all i need is your email address... here or by private message
bit sent 21:59
perl6-on-parrot will use the pugs test suite, yes 22:01
he pugs test suite will probably (someday) be put in its own repository. for now, it lives in the pugs repo 22:03
*the perl6 test suite...
22:13 Aankhen`` joined 22:18 xdg joined
svnbot6 r14942 | perlDreamer++ | testing commit bit 22:24
[particle] perlDreamer++ 22:26
[particle] heads off to do some errands
diotalevi Someone, send me a commit bit. 22:48
diotalevi lost his after the move and didn't bother to get a new one. 22:49
22:58 diakopter joined 23:09 Psyche^ joined 23:18 nperez joined 23:22 Psyche^ is now known as Patterner 23:23 nanonyme joined 23:54 drbean joined

Powered by Cro and the RakuĀ® Programming Language.

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

Thank you!