Slash Boxes
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

chaoticset (2105)

  (email not shown publicly)
AOL IM: chaoticset23 (Add Buddy, Send Message)
Yahoo! ID: illuminatus_foil (Add User, Send Message)

JAPH. (That's right -- I'm not Really Inexperienced any more.)

I'm not just here, I'm here [], and here [] too, I ramble randomly in my philosophical blog [] and my other blog []. Soon I'll come in a convenient six-pack.

Journal of chaoticset (2105)

Thursday July 31, 2003
10:25 AM

Apocalypso, Exegenesis part I

[ #13812 ]
I'm trying to read through the 6th Apoc and Exe right now, concurrently. Immediate reaction notes on the matter:
  • The distinction about the &, where sub calls cannot have them and refs always do, is Probably A Good Thing, but feels restrictive. Ah well.
  • Hey, waaaaiiit a second...are named parameters required?! That's icky if it's so...
  • Ooh, you can switch if incoming params are copies or aliases or read-onlys...that's nifty.
  • (A Beavis And Butt-Head moment) Huh-huh. "Slurpy" arguments. Huh-huh.
  • Oooh, wow, the := binding operator! Spiffykeen! I need to read the exegeses I missed...)

For personal reference, my next page is this one.

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Nope, named parameters are not required. I can guarantee you that... :)
    • It didn't seem Perlish, but...well, plenty of Perl 6 doesn't quite seem to fit the paradigm until (Larry|Damian) explain why it fits. Thank you for the confirmation. :)

      You are what you think.