There's More Than One Way To Do It, and by "do it" we mean "refer to the programming language by name"pic.twitter.com/87y5BZ4Elw
Show this thread
-
I actually think it's really good to draw a honking great dividing line between "strings" meaning Unicode text objects and "strings" meaning arrays of octets. Give them very distinct APIs and so on. Programming languages which confuse the two are broken IMO
Perl 6 actually makes a bunch of good decisions here! The `.graphs` and `.chars` methods are just what you need The problem is every Perl 6 string is still *also* an array, of length 1, for some reason
-
-
Yeah, it has some pretty badass Unicode support. But all I said was that I don't particularly mind that single items can be treated as 1-element lists (as long as this is explicit, not just some trap assumption by the language at times) - explicit call of a list method suffices.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Here's the thing: thing Is that a thing or a list of things? P6 sees things both ways. If you treat the thing / list of things above as a thing, then it's one thing. Eg a string. If you treat it as a list then it's a list with one element in it (the thing), so its .elems is 1.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.