On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 11:37:47AM +0300, Moshe Zadka wrote: > [Moshe Zadka] > > PUSH "1" > > PUSH "2" > > BINARY_ADD > > > > In Python that gives "12". In Perl that gives 3. > > Unless you suggest a PERL_BINARY_ADD and a PYTHON_BINARY_ADD, I > > don't see how you can around these things. > > [Tim] > > Perl needs distinct flavors of BINARY_ADD for its infix "+" and "." > > operators. Once you accept that, there's no real problem here (it simply > > means that Python's and Perl's "+" operators would need to map to different > > opcodes). > And if you call Python's + opcode PYTHON_BINARY_ADD and Perl's > PERL_BINARY_ADD, it's exactly what I said, isn't it? > Are you agreeing or disagreeing with me? ;-) He's disagreeing. It's not a PERL vs. PYTHON ADD at all; it's a "string concatenation add" vs. "numerical add". Perl code using the string concatenation operator (apparently, it's not going to be ".", which scares me shitless: Perl6 gets a new string concat operator, but it isn't going to be "+" ? If it is going to be '+', how does it flexitype ?) would use the string-concat add opcode, and Perl code and Python code doing '+' would get the normal BINARY_ADD. The string-to-int conversion in Perl's '+' would be put into the 'Scalar' type. Channeling-Tim--probably-wrong-<wink>-ly y'rs, -- Thomas Wouters <thomas@xs4all.net> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4