| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Comments:
<0> I KNOW
<1> 16:39 -!- Topic for #perl-es: Bienvenidos a Perl en espaol. Cualquier pregunta demorar en ser contestada. La respuesta aunque tarde SIEMPRE llega.
<1> glad you tried it :-) did you like it?
<2> hmm, [] and {} are not listed in operator precedence table
<0> ...in a shallow grave.
<3> Teratogen: they are not operators
<2> sure they are
<4> they're outfix
<2> outfix operators!
<4> not really operators
<2> oh
<4> they can't possibly 'conflict'
<4> so they don't need a precedence
<2> they aren't mentioned in perlop
<2> so yeah, I guess they aren't operators
<2> there something inbetweenish
<2> they're
<2> where are they documented?
<2> perlsyntax?
<4> perldoc perlref
<5> Type 'perldoc perlref' in your shell or go to http://perldoc.perl.org/perlref.html
<4> because they create references
<4> presuming you mean [ LIST ] and { LIST }
<0> Maybe he means $a[0] and $h{key}
<2> well, that too
<2> but primarily I mean [ expr ] and { expr }
<4> then LIST< yes
<4> and perldoc perlref
<4> as was previously mentioned
<2> ok
<3> Teratogen: [ expr ] and { expr } are operands, not operators
<0> TYBALT89!
<0> TYBALT89++
<0> TYBALT90!
<3> hi Yaakov
<0> perlbot: karma tybalt89
<6> Karma for tybalt89: 43
<0> Hmm...
<0> TYBLAT132!
<0> err
<0> TYBALT132!
<2> but wouldn't you say that [] operates on expr in [ expr ] to create a reference to an array?
<4> at some point, that isotope will be unstable
<3> nope
<2> so what is [] doing?
<7> I would
<4> I'll disagree with tybalt89 here
<4> they are operands to the larger expression
<4> but operators to their contained expression
<2> so [] and {} ARE operators (of a sort)
<4> just like "2 + 3" can be viewed as an operand, of course
<4> but with regard to the "+" being an operator
<4> on 2 and 3
<2> I like the term "outfix operator"
<2> merlyn++
<4> teratogen - perl6 allows defining arbitrary outfix operators
<7> I prefer circumfix
<4> outboard operators :)
<2> circumcize operators?
<2> circumsize
<4> circumspect
<7> circumstains
<4> circumvent
<2> uhm, stains?
<2> ick.
<2> now $foo[$bar], in that case [] is a "subscript operator", I would say
<7> not really
<7> it's $ [] and it's part of variable syntax
<4> Nope. in that case, $ ___ [ ___ ] is the syntax
<2> oh, it's just syntax
<2> ok
<2> of course in a postfix notation language you can make everything a function... there's no difference between an operator, a function, a "do loop", etc.
<2> these are somewhat arbitrary divisions imposed upon us by the compiler
<4> Yes! stupid compiler - making arbitrary divisions!
<4> it should be *multipplying*
<4> not dividing
<2> even subscripting would be a function, i.e., a 3 []
<4> in smalltalk, everything is a message send
<4> that makes sense for a unification
<2> never fooled around with smalltalk
<7> in haskell, ! is infix subscripting
<4> subscripting is "someArray at: 3"
<4> or "someArray from: 6 to: 9"
<4> for a slice
<2> so, a[3] would be syntactic sugar for a 3 []
<2> in my little postfix notation scripting language
<4> that looks like forth
<4> have you played with forth?
<2> yes, very forthish
<2> yes I have
<4> may the forth be with you!
<2> speaking of which, I just watched Spaceballs for the nth time.
<2> "I always have coffee when I watch radar! you know that! everybody knows that!!"
<2> that should be in AFI's top quotes
<8> hrm, quick way to get a random item out of an @array?
<2> there's a one liner for that
<2> I have it somewhere
<0> List:Util
<8> eval: @array = qw/foo bar baz/; $array[rand $#array+1];
<5> infi: baz
<8> eval: @array = qw/foo bar baz/; $array[rand $#array+1];
<5> infi: bar
<8> nice.
<0> :
<3> #array[rand @array]
<7> infi: eww
<3> $array[rand @array]
<8> oh, duh.
<8> thanks tybalt89 :)
<9> Is there a module to check validity of a URL? something like Email::Valid, but for URLs.
<10> ofer0: There are interfaces to the W3C validator online.
<10> The W3C also has a bundle to aid in installing your own, but you'll need Apache for it
<4> there's a Regex::Common::Web or something
<4> that has a URI matcher
<11> do you mean validating url syntax or validating the content of an html document?
<10> Oh, or URI:: if that's wha tyou mean.
<9> url syntax
<12> there's this perl culture that rewards those writing code in the obscurest way possible. it's the anti-christ of programming languages
<4> see Regexp::Common::URI
<4> tkup - trolling?
<9> merlyn, thanks
<4> if anything, that's a small subculture
<4> not mainstream
<13> tkup: if that were the case, i'd be getting ***istance ;)
<4> if you paint the entire Perl community as worshiping golfers and japhers, you're highly mislead and misleading.
<12> merlyn, no, just letting out some frustration
<4> In fact, as someone who makes a living from writing perl code, I completely abhor the japhers and golfers
<4> odd, since I invented the JAPH
<7> there's this C culture that rewards those etc...
<4> but the golfers are clearly giving perl a bad name, and for that I am disappointed.
<9> merlyn, , which is better to use? http://search.cpan.org/~sonnen/Data-Validate-URI-0.01/lib/Data/Validate/URI.pm or http://search.cpan.org/~abigail/Regexp-Common-2.120/lib/Regexp/Common/URI.pm
<0> You too, golfy.
<14> ofer0's url is at http://xrl.us/nzn7
<14> ofer0's url is at http://xrl.us/nzn8
<4> ofer0 - no opinion
<4> haven't used them both
<15> huh? how are they giving Perl a bad name?
<4> I used the latter, and it worked for me.
<9> okay
<9> thanks
<4> Elly_Laptop - witness tkup's comments
<16> ofer0: use whichever works
<9> perl -le 'sub _{$_=shift;tr/elicsnmodxwut/wtux nom ceil/;}my$x="cunitusmldwomxtwe";_$x;print scalar reverse;'
<4> that's what happens when golfers get fixated on by the public
Return to
#perl
or
Go to some related
logs:
#perl
apt-get mysql_config
#postfix
Launching HTTP Cache Cleaner
ubuntu install dialog
Ubuntu LVM mount filesystem
ubuntu 6 tightvncviewer
setNumbersInput
livina rpmforge
gentoo netsetup part of
|
|