RE: Pike 8.0 RC1

I am pretty sure that there is some bug in Process.run().

Sometimes, the returned value ->stdout is "", but it should not be.
I cannot yet reproduct this bug, buy I know it is there.

Process.pmod in Pike 7.8 is ok.

Just be ware of it.

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Pike 8.0 RC1
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 22:36:57 +0800




The CHANGES file:

o Added new syntax for literal-string constants

  #{, #( and #[ starts a literal string, and it is ended by the
  corresponding end marker: #}, #) and #] respectively.

  No character is modified at all inside the literal string, including
  newlines, \ " and '.

  So, the string #["\n\'##] will be equivalent to "\"\\n\\'#".

  The main use-case is to write code in code:

  | string code = #[
  |  void main(int c, array v) {
  |    string x = "";
  |    foreach( v[1..], string elm )
  |      x += reverse(elm)+",";
  |    write("Testing: %s\n", reverse( x ));
  | #];

  The three different start/end markers might be useful if you write
  code in code in code, since there is no way to quote the start/end
  markers.

o Added the '?:' operator for compatibility with other C-like
  languages. It is identical to '||' in pike.


> Subject: RE: Pike 8.0 RC1
> To: [email protected]
> From: [email protected]
> Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 14:20:01 +0000
> 
> I've never seen #{ etc, where/when are those used?
> 
>  >About '?:' . Is it just equal to '||' ? if so, why should we added
>  >this? We cannot be compatible with every C-like languages. Why
>  >should we be compatible with a special one?
> 
> ?: is not equal to || and it has been in Pike since µLPC (1993 or so).
> 

I think it's not a same '?:' we talked about.