1897Re: [hackers-il] Re: Perl 5 TNG
- Feb 11, 2002On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> > Then, the first priority will be a mechanism for interlingual binding.But will this mechanism be friendly to users?
> > Something like what they claim that MS .NET claims to support.
> > Such a mechanism had better be able to figure out how to call a C++
> > procedure just by reading the corresponding header file.
> Parrot (http://www.parrotcode.org/) will have a common way to define
> bindings to it. That does not mean those bindings will be suitable or
> well-formed for any language front-end implemented above it, but they will
> be usable. Assuming Perl 5 TNG will use Parrot (which I don't see a reason
> why it should not), It will enjoy this binding stuff.
Suppose I find that COOL library, and it has only C language bindings (in
the form of header files). How can I bind to it from my new Perl 5 TNG
scripts without doing things more complicated than writing declarations
> That's not what I aim for. No, I don't want P5TNG to be fully compatibleThe meaning of regular '+' is that if it is given string arguments, it
> with Perl 5, but I do want it to look and behave much the same. Naturally,
> assuming it will have bulk operations on arrays, than if $+ is for string
> concatenation, and @+ is for array addition, the array string concation
> should be something like @$+. According to the apocalypses array stuffs
> are no ^+, ^^+, etc, but I can specify that they are @+ if I want.
tries to convert them into integers and then sum them. $+ would convert
any integers into strings before addition. For example:
1 + 1 == 2
1 $+ 1 == "11"
"1" + "2" == 3
"1" $+ "2" == "12"
@+ would, similarly, convert its arguments into arrays (if necessary)
before concatenating them. Regular + or $+ would perform
> Another issue is accumolators. If anybody is familiar with matlab, heYes, use sum(@my_tensor,2) and the like. For any missing elements (due to
> knows that sum, max, min and other accumolators operate on one dimension
> of a tensor. Should we have sum($my_tensor, 2) to sum its second
> dimension? As you know a multi-dim array in perl may be something like:
> [ [1,2,3,4,5,6], [3,4,5], [2,9], [1,2,3,4,5] ]
> I.e: not of the same length. I'm not sure I'd like to put PDL right in the
> core language.
short rows), substitute the null value and use whatever value defined for
addition of null values.
Also, generalize the notation (I don't have a suggestion at the moment) to
other operators, which can be applied to tensor elements.
> > > 1. Binding a variable to a type.Due to the same reason people grep strings, rather than search_matches
> > >
> > > Perl is a dynamically typed language, but obviously some people will find
> > > it nice if it will behave somewhat statically-typed sometimes. This will
> > > be a problem with having more than one such type in a combined expression:
> > > "$myint + $mystring" or "$myint . $mystring".
> > I love this idea. How about a gypsum() operator, which freezes a variable
> > to the type which it has when operated upon by gypsum()? It would be good
> > idea also in other dynamically typed languages. This is the perfect
> > trade-off between not wasting time on unessentials like declaring variable
> > types when prototyping things, and making software crash-proof when it
> > goes out of prototyping and gets feature-stable.
> Sounds nice. Actually, I decided that statically-typed variables are not a
> top priority, but I'll keep this gypsum idea in mind. But why not call it
> freeze_type() ?
strings. Use "unexpected" words, to spice up the language.
There is no IGLU Cabal. This has been a goal not worth pursuing.
WARNING TO SPAMMERS: see at http://www.zak.co.il/spamwarning.html
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>