Re: RFC 231 (v1) Data: Multi-dimensional arrays/hashes and slices
[email protected] (Karl Glazebrook) Mon, 25 Sep 2000 18:30:22 -0400
| Newsgroups | perl.perl6.language.data |
|---|---|
| Organization | Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, Johns Hopkins University |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Ilya Zakharevich wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 11:32:58AM -0400, Karl Glazebrook wrote: > > Yes this is the point. I guess another way of looking at it is > > saying that 3*@a operates in a list context not a scalar context > > Well, this shows that you entirely miss the problem of cryptocontexts. > Context is determined by the "environment" of the operation, not by > the operation. Context is propagated: > > the-left-hand-side-of-assignment ---> the-right-hand-side-of-assignment so what is wrong with the statement '@y = 3*@x;' then ? > outside ---> inside > About doing numerics with the current Perl: consider arrays as > shapeless aggregates of whatever you can put there. Vectors are not > shapeless, so cannot be represented by arrays. sure this is what we do with PDL now. > > Changing Perl in this respect will make one particular mode of > operation a tiny bit simpler, but (without major changes to > cryptocontexting - <PLUG> see for example my interview on perl.com > </PLUG>) will make life much harder in other modes of operation. I read your interview. Hope you get to the bottom of the whole integrability thing sounds like fascinating work. I think major changes are what we aree talking about here. > Remember: do you do your system mainainance in Mathematica? Why? > Remember that Wolfram *wanted* you to do this? Perl5 is much better > balanced. You are pulling the blanket to your side of the bed. I am not sure what point you are trying to make about Mathematica? I have read intevrviews with Woldfram ,he is clearky an egomanica and thinks everything should be an expression, but I am not sure he was arguing for system management in Mathematica. Karl