Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
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 ]

Journal of luqui (5770)

Thursday January 19, 2006
09:13 PM

Yesterday's Perl 6 Meeting Notes

[ #28406 ]

Luke:
        - I started school today
        - I have five hours in a row of classes
        - started to learn Scala outright, as if I were to program in it
        - I read three papers about its cool object model
        - it seems that it has every cool idea I've already thought of
        - the idea that a role isn't just an object really seems like a good idea
            to me
        - they're not just for composing into classes
        - they're for composing into anything
        - a collection of stuff
        - I don't see any downsides except for the lack of strict subtyping
        - but there's a neat result: parameterized classes
        - they're the same as virtual classes
        - just make roles purely compositional
        - not subtyping things
        - eventually I'll write a document on my thoughts

c:
        - why do you lose subtyping?

Luke:
        - if you can compose anything, you can compose class names
        - you can compose those, you lose subtyping based on how that class is
            used in the rest of that role
        - if you use the virtual class for argument types, you have to have a
            contravariant relation

Larry:
        - busy with my day job
        - just keeping up with the mailing lists
        - I have another week or two of heavy duty work
        - eventually I'll get back to the translator
        - I have to prepare a talk for it for OSDC Israel
        - also thinking through how to make a lower impedence mismatch connection
            between my AST and some of the Pugs projects

Jesse:
        - is it worth throwing random ASTs at them?

Larry:
        - not yet

Jesse:
        - did they convince you to visit Japan?

Larry:
        - didn't take much convincing

Allison:
        - haven't touched Punie in about three days
        - I finished off comma lists since last week
        - still haven't heard from Patrick
        - have other things I need to fix too
        - I might start on functions before operators
        - besides control structures, that's about it

c:
        - don't forget regexes
        - they gave me trouble

Allison:
        - I might just implement a compatibility layer

Jesse:
        - how's the licensing going?

Allison:
        - I'll release something within two weeks, even if I don't have comments
            from everyone I asked to comment

Jesse:
        - sounds good

Damian:
        - working frantically to write a keynote for next week
        - involved a lot of photoshopping Peter Jackson
        - also negotiating with Japanese folks for the YAPC there
        - preparing for the talk has thrown up a lot of questions for the mailing
            list
        - I'm still curious about a special way to declare class methods
        - Larry seems to be keen not to tie them down
        - there are a lot of people who'd like the option

Larry:
        - it can always be the option

Damian:
        - I'm trying to show syntax, though
        - I could just have a blurry screen
        - maybe I'll just show it with some fake syntax

Luke:
        - I couldn't come up with a good single word for that
        - Rob Kinyon kind of has a point with the polymorphism there

Larry:
        - more of a cultural one, as far as I see it

Damian:
        - no doubt about that
        - there are plenty of people who want to leave Java without leaving the
            Java mindset

Larry:
        - it'd be interesting to see how much information the type inferencer
            gives us for free

Luke:
        - it would be wise not to rely on it
        - there hasn't been much research into inferencing these type models

Damian:
        - even inferrence doesn't mark them physically in the syntax
        - people like that

Luke:
        - it's like Haskell
        - you don't have to put explicit types on your functions
        - but people do -- for documentation and future-proofness

Damian:
        - and checking your logic of the system
        - you're showing what you believe about a system

Luke:
        - Haskell will catch you eventually
        - but it won't point you to the right place without prototypes

Damian:
        - I almost had a bad moment and suggested "state"

Luke:
        - I don't understand how partially undefinedness supports prototype-based
            OO
        - replying to Rob's thread might answer that

Larry:
        - I'll think about that

Jesse:
        - fighting with customers mostly this past week
        - went to the GPL v3 thing Monday and Tuesday
        - talking to potential Ponie contributors, but one fell through
        - two people are interested in hacking
        - they asked what there is to do
        - Jerry Gay is poking at getting a Windows box for regular Parrot builds

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • I've ordered a copy of the Microsoft Action Pack, which comes with pretty much "1 of everything" in terms of Win32 operating systems (although not CE).

    I'm planning on hiring a uni student for a couple of weekends to install them all into system images, and then use those as a PITA test case, doing parrot builds on the entire Win32 family of OSes.