Re^4: (Sort of) poll: what Perl6 features do you consider {likely,desirable} to leak into P5?

Having (just) managed to work my way through the process of adding a new keyword, I have a new (but still basic) understanding of the process involved in toke.c.

Hey, you can't give that hint without telling the whole thing: now I'm too curious. What is it? What is it about?

If the macro facility was added, then you might be able to define a few catchall keywords that would act as placeholders in the syntax. Say uniop() and binop() and then wrap those in macros to define an new operator. Not sure about that.

And even in that case it wouldn't have quite the same power Perl6's equivalents are supposed to have, e.g. in terms of user-definable priority. Unless a whole array of new uniop()s and binop()s are also defined, which seems rather awkward after all...

Comment on Re^4: (Sort of) poll: what Perl6 features do you consider {likely,desirable} to leak into P5? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: (Sort of) poll: what Perl6 features do you consider {likely,desirable} to leak into P5? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Mar 10, 2005 at 10:12 UTC
What is it? What is it about? I've implemented say. Would you care to test the patch for me? It's built against the perl5.8.6 sources from CPAN. I don't have bandwidth to stay current with bleedperl. If a few other people would care to try this for me, drop me an email addy by /msg and I'll forward the patch. It's all of 63 lines. I guess I could post it here if that would be easier? Examine what is said, not who speaks. Silence betokens consent. Love the truth but pardon error.	[reply]
Re^6: (Sort of) poll: what Perl6 features do you consider {likely,desirable} to leak into P5? by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Mar 10, 2005 at 13:24 UTC
As I have been trying to do the same thing (with much less free time), I'd love to see what you did. I'll test the patch. Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing. Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid. Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence. Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.	[reply]
Re^7: (Sort of) poll: what Perl6 features do you consider {likely,desirable} to leak into P5? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Mar 10, 2005 at 17:06 UTC
Don't bother. Updated for the record: The reason for suggesting that dragonchild "should not bother" with implementing a say() patch, is because I had already offered same to p5p and they had rejected the idea out of hand. Apparently, Perl 5 is so close to the end of it's life that adding new keywords is verbotten! Examine what is said, not who speaks. Silence betokens consent. Love the truth but pardon error. Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: (Sort of) poll: what Perl6 features do you consider {likely,desirable} to leak into P5? by blazar (Canon) on Mar 10, 2005 at 13:00 UTC
I've implemented say. Would you care to test the patch for me? [SNIP] It's all of 63 lines. I guess I could post it here if that would be easier? Personally I don't have much time, but if you post it here I am quite sure that people would receive it positively. I thought you were part of p5p or working along with someone of them. Why don't you try contacting them?	[reply]


We don't bite newbies here... much
	PerlMonks