From mcduffee at gmail.com Wed Dec 20 17:32:38 2017 From: mcduffee at gmail.com (David McDuffee) Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:32:38 -0800 Subject: [Oc-pm] PerlMongers at SCaLE 16x Message-ID: SCaLE 16x is planned for March 2018. We've had a booth at the expo for several years, and I've signed up volunteers for it the past few years. There may be enough interest to do it again this year, but I'm not going to be able to organize it and schedule volunteers this time around. I'm asking for someone who will take over those duties this year. I'll help (I have a very nice banner I can pass along!), but someone else will have to pick up the torch if the Permongers are going to continue to have a presence in the exhibit hall. Let me know as soon as possible if you're interested. Thanks! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bobmath11 at icloud.com Fri Dec 29 10:43:42 2017 From: bobmath11 at icloud.com (Bob Mathews) Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 10:43:42 -0800 Subject: [Oc-pm] perl6 if Message-ID: We're going to be talking Control Flow in perl6 for January's meeting, right? Most major languages these days have C-derived syntax. An if statement looks like this: if (...) { ... } else { ... } In most C-derived languages, the parens are required, but the squiggle brackets are optional. (This causes some ambiguity when the "..."s contain other if statements, but whatever.) In perl5, both the parens and squigglies are required. But in perl6, the parens are optional and the squigglies are required. Not sure why they decided to go the opposite direction from every other language, but again, whatever. I tend to prefer the Bourne shell syntax: if ... then ... else ... fi But I suppose that's horribly old-fashioned. Anyway, just my two cents. Anyone have any thoughts? -bob -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mike at mikebaas.org Sat Dec 30 07:35:33 2017 From: mike at mikebaas.org (Mike Baas) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 07:35:33 -0800 Subject: [Oc-pm] perl6 if In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I like squigglies and optional parens. I don't like bash's lack of restraints. I wish bash was perl almost everytime. On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 10:43 AM, Bob Mathews wrote: > We're going to be talking Control Flow in perl6 for January's meeting, > right? > > Most major languages these days have C-derived syntax. An if statement looks > like this: > > if (...) { ... } else { ... } > > In most C-derived languages, the parens are required, but the squiggle > brackets are optional. (This causes some ambiguity when the "..."s contain > other if statements, but whatever.) In perl5, both the parens and squigglies > are required. But in perl6, the parens are optional and the squigglies are > required. Not sure why they decided to go the opposite direction from every > other language, but again, whatever. > > I tend to prefer the Bourne shell syntax: > > if ... then ... else ... fi > > But I suppose that's horribly old-fashioned. Anyway, just my two cents. > Anyone have any thoughts? > > -bob > > > _______________________________________________ > Oc-pm mailing list > Oc-pm at pm.org > http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/oc-pm > From bobmath11 at icloud.com Sat Dec 30 07:50:45 2017 From: bobmath11 at icloud.com (Bob Mathews) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 07:50:45 -0800 Subject: [Oc-pm] perl6 if In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: <9654BD50-B939-4309-A265-0452A3EA91E7@icloud.com> > On Dec 30, 2017, at 7:35 AM, Mike Baas wrote: > I don't like bash's lack of restraints. I wish bash was perl almost everytime. I wasn't trying to promote bash as a programming language. I just meant that I kind of like the old-school flava of its (Algol-derived) syntax. I tend to agree that almost every bash script is eventually going to make you wish you had used perl instead. -bob From tony at metracom.com Sat Dec 30 17:32:27 2017 From: tony at metracom.com (Tony) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 17:32:27 -0800 Subject: [Oc-pm] perl6 if In-Reply-To: <9654BD50-B939-4309-A265-0452A3EA91E7@icloud.com> References:

<9654BD50-B939-4309-A265-0452A3EA91E7@icloud.com> Message-ID: <2084a160-da74-f8e0-52b1-42e2e77e30b5@metracom.com> I always follow these simple rules. * To fix Windows install Linux. * To fix Bash script replace it with Perl or Python. I don't consider Shell scripting a programming language. Its a powerless command line scripting language. Tony ----------Reply---------- *From:* Bob Mathews *Sent:* Saturday, December 30, 2017 at 7:50AM *To:* Oc-pm *Subject:* Re: [Oc-pm] perl6 if >> On Dec 30, 2017, at 7:35 AM, Mike Baas wrote: >> I don't like bash's lack of restraints. I wish bash was perl almost everytime. > I wasn't trying to promote bash as a programming language. I just meant that I kind of like the old-school flava of its (Algol-derived) syntax. I tend to agree that almost every bash script is eventually going to make you wish you had used perl instead. > > -bob > _______________________________________________ > Oc-pm mailing list > Oc-pm at pm.org > http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/oc-pm > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bobmath11 at icloud.com Sat Dec 30 19:46:54 2017 From: bobmath11 at icloud.com (Bob Mathews) Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2017 19:46:54 -0800 Subject: [Oc-pm] perl6 if In-Reply-To: <2084a160-da74-f8e0-52b1-42e2e77e30b5@metracom.com> References:

<9654BD50-B939-4309-A265-0452A3EA91E7@icloud.com> <2084a160-da74-f8e0-52b1-42e2e77e30b5@metracom.com> Message-ID: <9066C6EA-E4DF-4312-AF26-232A68CD92E4@icloud.com> > On Dec 30, 2017, at 5:32 PM, Tony wrote: > I don't consider Shell scripting a programming language. Its a powerless command line scripting language. > See also: Turing tar-pit http://www.catb.org/esr/jargon/html/T/Turing-tar-pit.html -bob -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: