|
01:12
kylese left
01:14
kylese joined
01:22
wayland76 joined,
wayland left
02:15
kylese left
02:17
kylese joined
02:48
elcaro left,
elcaro joined
03:12
apogee_ntv left,
apogee_ntv joined
04:08
cm left
04:09
stanrifkin joined
04:16
cm joined
04:37
kjp_ joined
04:41
kjp left
04:50
kylese left
04:56
kylese joined
05:01
derpydoo joined
05:55
Aedil joined
07:01
Sgeo left
07:19
Aedil left
|
|||
| disbot | <simon_sibl> why the :g adverb cannot be used with rx but with m ? | 08:08 | |
|
08:53
hvxgr left
09:03
hvxgr joined
10:00
lichtkind joined
|
|||
| disbot | <jubilatious1_98524> Not sure how to explain it: rx is a sequence of atoms that will be used within a regex-matcher. m denotes the matcher itself. Only m can take the adverbs (e.g. :g) that tune the Raku regex engine, probably because these can only be declared once per matcher (although some local exceptions exist, :i for example). | 10:18 | |
| <simon_sibl> because I wanted to capture all numbers in a string but I could only make it work using m:g/\d+/, and I encountered something weird, when using m:g/something {code}/ it doesnt seem to process all the match, I need to force it by looping over $/ to get all the matches and execute all the code, I was wondering if rx would have the same behavior, or if m:g is lazy by default or something | 10:57 | ||
|
11:14
sftp left
11:20
LainIwakura joined
11:40
Aedil joined
11:46
benchable6 left,
notable6 left,
shareable6 left,
coverable6 left,
unicodable6 left,
bisectable6 left,
quotable6 left,
evalable6 left,
sourceable6 left,
tellable6 left,
linkable6 left
11:49
greppable6 joined,
tellable6 joined
11:50
unicodable6 joined
11:51
coverable6 joined
11:53
evalable6 joined
11:55
notable6 joined
11:57
nativecallable6 joined
12:08
LainIwakura left
12:30
derpydoo left
12:48
bd3i left,
bd3i joined
|
|||
| disbot | <antononcube> @lizmat I think it is good idea to have a Raku documentation/sites navigation LLM persona. | 12:57 | |
| <antononcube> Agh -- that is actually wayland"s post. | 12:58 | ||
|
13:00
apa_c joined
|
|||
| lizmat | weekly: dev.to/lizmat/purl-support-4m8h | 13:03 | |
| notable6 | lizmat, Noted! (weekly) | ||
|
13:12
apa_c left
|
|||
| disbot | <antononcube> What is a good / better way to determine what a string doesn't have interpretation variables in it? I can, of course, make a regex which looks for sigiled sub-strings and/or code blocks, but is that enough? There might be a better way, given that Raku has a full-blown qq/qqx DSL. | 13:12 | |
| lizmat | antononcube a string with interpretation variables in them, doesn't exist: they're a grammar construct | 13:13 | |
|
13:13
avar left
13:14
avar joined
|
|||
| lizmat | "foo$bar-baz" is just a short way of saying "foo ~ $bar ~ "-baz" | 13:14 | |
| disbot | <antononcube> I'm sorry I meant "interpolation". (It was AutoCorrected..) | ||
| lizmat | "foo$bar+baz" is just a short way of saying "foo ~ $bar ~ "+baz" | 13:15 | |
| in the AST / QAST there's just that expression | |||
| so is the question: check whether 'foo$bar+baz" has a $bar string in it? | 13:16 | ||
| s/"/' | |||
| disbot | <antononcube> I want to check is a string a potential string template that has to be filled in with variable values. For example: (1) 'escaped $x not interpolation', (2) "percent %hash interpolation", (3) "brace { 1 + 2 } interpolation", etc. | 13:29 | |
| lizmat | try to EVAL the string and see if it produces errors ? | 13:30 | |
|
13:30
stanrifkin left,
apa_c joined
|
|||
| disbot | <antononcube> Yeah, that is a good, concise approach. The &has-interpolation sub I have is way too big and cumbersome. | 13:32 | |
| <m.dango> The L10N project prompted a thought: Would it be worth having filter as a synonym for grep? I don't think its a term we use anywhere in Raku currently, and Perl is exceptional in using the term grep for the higher order function: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_(high..._function) | 13:48 | ||
| <antononcube> @m.dango Why using "filter" why not using "select"? | 13:50 | ||
| <antononcube> Meaning, I think it is fine to just have grep. | |||
| lizmat | fwiw, for newbies without unix background, I think "filter" would make a lot of sense | 13:51 | |
| disbot | <m.dango> For why not "select" I guess I would phrase it as "select is Ruby's method for a filter, and grep is Raku's method for a filter", filter being the language-agnostic term. | 14:06 | |
| <jubilatious1_98524> Can't you just push matches onto an array? FYI you'll get a ton of info if you run dd m/ my match here / | 14:08 | ||
| lizmat | also, "select" feels more to select only one item, at least to me, akin to "first" rather than "grep" | ||
| disbot | <antononcube> But "filter" is both a verb and a noun. "Select" is a verb and adjective. "Grep" are just a verb. | 14:10 | |
| lizmat | so is frobnicate | 14:12 | |
| disbot | <jubilatious1_98524> @m.dango filter is a bad term. Are you "filtering in" or 'filtering out"? Much discussion about this in Perl6 docs. Don't do it. | ||
| <simon_sibl> I mean in the exo I was doing, I was doing this: | 14:13 | ||
| <simon_sibl> m:g/mul( (\d+), (\d+) ) {$sum += $0 * $1}/ (basically and without the quoting) | |||
| evalable6 | (exit code 1) ===SORRY!=== Error while compilin… | ||
| simon_sibl, Full output: gist.github.com/26d82ad14f2938e8dc...37ac74377d | |||
| disbot | <simon_sibl> this happens in a loop for each line of input, and I realized it only runs the first number it found, to force to do all the numbers it found in the ligne I had to "force" looping through $/ after all the matches | ||
| <simon_sibl> so something like this for ... {m:g/mul( (\d+), (\d+) ) {$sum += $0 * $1}/; .sink for $/[]} only then it would do all the matches and execute all the code blocks within the regex | 14:14 | ||
| <simon_sibl> and that doesnt make sense to me xD | |||
|
14:59
stanrifkin joined
15:11
arkiuat joined
15:56
arkiuat left
16:14
Sgeo joined
16:17
arkiuat joined
17:04
jjido joined
17:08
arkiuat left
17:16
jjido left
17:18
jjido joined
17:22
arkiuat joined
17:27
arkiuat left
17:54
arkiuat joined
17:59
arkiuat left
18:08
librasteve_ joined
|
|||
| disbot | <librasteve> fwiw - I think it would be weird to have two ways to write grep in raku | 18:10 | |
| <antononcube> One grep to rule them all!! | 18:12 | ||
|
18:12
arkiuat joined
|
|||
| disbot | <librasteve> no one (?) is proposing to rewrite Linux to have filter instead of grep, so since we want raku to play well as a command line utility I think it is a bonus to teach newbs that grep == filter in less refined languages | 18:12 | |
| librasteve_ | weekly: discourse.nixos.org/t/development-...ix/68028/8 | 18:13 | |
| notable6 | librasteve_, Noted! (weekly) | ||
| disbot | <antononcube> Correction -- grep filters out all the rest. | 18:16 | |
|
18:17
arkiuat left
18:23
grondilu left
18:24
jast left
18:46
jast joined
18:47
arkiuat joined
18:55
arkiuat left
19:12
Guest1057 left
19:13
Guest2599 joined
19:23
arkiuat joined
19:27
arkiuat left
19:51
arkiuat joined
19:56
arkiuat left
19:58
Aedil left
20:21
arkiuat joined
20:26
arkiuat left
20:33
apa_c left
20:40
DavidSch__ joined
20:52
arkiuat joined
20:57
arkiuat left
21:07
apac joined
|
|||
| disbot | <jubilatious1_98524> I'd probably say (to) frobnicate if I needed a verb, frobnicating if I needed a participle, and frobnication if I needed a noun. But only because of my native language. | 21:09 | |
|
21:11
apac left,
apac joined
|
|||
| disbot | <antononcube> Ok. "One frobnicator to rule them all!" sounds completely right. | 21:12 | |
|
21:17
apac left,
DavidSch__ left,
apac joined
21:19
jjido left
|
|||
| disbot | <jubilatious1_98524> @simonsibl ```~ % printf "19 20\n21\n22\n" | \ raku -ne 'BEGIN my @matches; my $line = $; @matches.push($/.Str) if m:g/ (\d+) (\d+) / for $line; END .say for @matches;' 19 20 21 22 ``` | 21:26 | |
|
21:26
arkiuat joined
|
|||
| disbot | <jubilatious1_98524> Simpler: ~ % printf "19 20\n21\n22\n" | \ raku -ne 'BEGIN my @matches; @matches.push($/.Str) if m:g/ (\d+) (\d+) /; END .say for @matches;' 19 20 21 22 | 21:28 | |
|
21:41
itaipu joined
21:54
wayland joined,
wayland76 left
|
|||
| disbot | <jubilatious1_98524> @antononcube I've relied on the .raku (or .perl) routine to tell me what the compiler sees. But thsi might help: ~ % printf 'foo$bar+baz\n' | raku -ne 'put m/<-[\\]>+ \$bar/ ?? .raku !! "backslashed-input";' "foo\$bar+baz" ~ % printf 'foo\$bar+baz\n' | raku -ne 'put m/<-[\\]>+ \$bar/ ?? .raku !! "backslashed-input";' backslashed-input | 21:56 | |
|
22:02
apac left
22:09
arkiuat left
22:33
stanrifkin left
22:36
wayland76 joined,
wayland left
22:37
arkiuat joined
22:42
arkiuat left,
AlexDaniel joined
22:48
unicodable6 left
22:50
bisectable6 joined
22:55
committable6 joined
22:56
releasable6 joined
23:01
unicodable6 joined
23:02
wayland76 left
23:06
lichtkind left
23:21
arkiuat joined
23:39
simcop2387 left
23:40
simcop2387 joined
|
|||