Date: 2.16.2017 / Article Rating: 5 / Votes: 6153 #Knights and samurai comparison

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Knights and samurai comparison

Essay Writer for All Kinds of Papers - knights and samurai comparison

Nov/Sun/2017 | Uncategorized

Order Essay Services & Assignment Papers Online -
The Medieval European Knight vs The Feudal Japanese…

Nov 12, 2017 Knights and samurai comparison, how to buy essay cheap with no worries -

Knights and Samurai: Comparing the Feudal…

Artists: Know the knights Difference Between a Resume and a C.V. Pants! Artists, like everyone else, sometimes need to explain who they are and what they can do. Artists, however, have careers on two tracks: The first track, for and samurai comparison most, is some job that puts food in their stomachs, clothes on the lady's their back, a roof over knights and samurai comparison, their heads and pays for health insurance; the second track is savage in the tempest developing a presence in the art world, through exhibitions, commissions and other activities that reflect their artistic achievements. It is ideal when the two tracks come together -- the art sells, providing a full livelihood -- and that is the goal, but that may not happen soon or even ever. For that reason, artists generally need to knights document themselves in two ways.

The first is jonathan swift the lady's room through a resume, and the second is through a C.V. And Samurai! (curriculum vitae). The two documents may overlap here and there but tend to on Personal Statement I Want be quite separate, and here's the reason: why would a dealer want to know that the artist worked as a waitress? How useful is it to describe all one's one-person shows to knights comparison the personnel director at a corporation? Artists should know what a resume looks like and contains, what a curiculum vitae (or C.V.) describes, and when to concepto submit one or the other. A resume is an employment history, detailing the jobs the individual has had, what he or she did at those positions and any particular skills that would make the person desirable to another employer. A standard, job-oriented, reverse-chronology resume would look like this: Salt Lake City, UT 84002. (801) 555-5555 (home) (801) 555-4444 (office) [e-mail address, if applicable] I am skilled in Windows, Quark, PhotoShop and and samurai comparison, other Apple and PC-based computer software that has applicability to business. I have experience in budgeting and payroll as well as supervising staff, event planning, publicity and concepto, visual merchandising. 2007 to knights and samurai the Present.

Office manager, Arcadian Art Supply, Salt Lake City. Selected and purchased products from wholesalers, developed the east schism annual budget, managed payroll, hired and supervised the full- and part-time sales staff Computerized product inventory Originated and and samurai, coordinated the monthly Artist Talk series Installed annual regional juried art exhibitions. 2006 to 2007 (part-time) Curatorial staff assistant, University Gallery, University of Utah at Ogden. Installed and assisted in Essay to Be, the design of knights exhibitions, corresponded with guest curators, benefactors and artists. 2005 and 2006 (May-August) Sales clerk, Books Things, Salt Lake City, Utah. Handled book orders and sales, coordinated book signing events, assisted in designing window displays.

Foundations course instructor, University of Utah at Ogden (2006 and 2007) Painting instructor at Hopkins Retirement Home, Salt Lake City, Utah (summer 2004) Master of Fine Arts, University of Utah at Ogden, 2007. Bachelor of Fine Arts, Spokane College of Art Design, Spokane, Washington, 1995. Savage Tempest! Available upon request. Resumes for those with less job experience, lots of short-term jobs or long periods between employment may need to be structured differently. Certainly, companies understand that summer is the time when students are able to work full-time; the brevity of knights and samurai employment is not held against east west schism a job-seeker.

When the applicant's history of employment consists of a number of jobs that lasted only and samurai comparison a few weeks or months, an itemization of every position with start and west, end dates as well as responsibilities would look odd and raise questions about the individual. Instead, one may create a category like this: Jobs Held Between 2006 and 2008. Sales clerk, Books Things, Salt Lake City, Utah. Library aide, University of Utah at Ogden. Secretary, Howards McCann Law Offices, Ogden, Utah. Cashier, Pick Save, Ogden, Utah. And Samurai Comparison! Life guard, Ogden Parks and Recreation Department, Ogden, Utah. Nanny, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Atlee, Salt Lake City, Utah. One might also describe jobs by category, such as Childcare, Office Jobs or whatever else fits one's background.

A C.V., on the other hand, is east west a professional history, identifying the individual's accomplishments to date. An artist's C.V., concentrating on artistic achievements, might resemble the following: Salt Lake City, UT 84002. [e-mail address, if applicable] Master of Fine Arts, University of Utah at Ogden, 2007. Bachelor of Fine Arts, Spokane College of knights comparison Art Design, Spokane, Washington, 2005. Green River Center for the Arts, Green River, Utah. Lawrence Hazelit Gallery, Monroe, Utah. Eugene Venman Gallery of the Statement I Want to Be a Filmmaker Solomon Jones Library, Salt Lake City, Utah. Lawrence Hazelit Gallery, Monroe, Utah. And Samurai Comparison! Selected Group Exhibitions. The Landscape Today, Kingsman-Marcum Gallery, Salt Lake City, Utah. Northwest Artists Invitational, Sprague Art Museum, Sprague, Washington (curated by Clint McConnell) Spring Annual, Lawrence Hazelit Gallery, Monroe, Utah. The Realist Tradition, Millcreek Center for the Arts, Milcreek, Utah (curated by luvs pants Wallace Everly)

Place and Time Cooperative Gallery, Spokane, Washington. Prairie Artisans and Artists Gallery, Midland, South Dakota. Spring Annual, Lawrence Hazelit Gallery, Monroe, Utah. A Woman's Place, Glenrose Cultural Center, Glenrose, Washington (organized by Western Women in the Arts) The Next Wave, University Gallery, University of knights and samurai comparison Utah at Ogden. Hotel Security! The Art of the Matter, Kingsman-Marcum Gallery, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Walla Walla Invitational, Northwestern Exposition Grounds, Walla Walla, Washington (curated by Elinor Herter-Johnson) Annual Spring Show, College Gallery, Spokane College of Art Design, Spokane, Washington. New Voices/New Songs, Seattle Visitors Center, Seattle, Washington. Foundations course instructor, University of Utah at Ogden. Painting instructor at Hopkins Retirement Home, Salt Lake City, Utah. And Samurai Comparison! Soft Focus on the Landscape, by Karen Wentworth, Seattle Post-Intelligencer , 2009. Landscapes at Lawrence Hazelit, by Theresa Lidel, Monroe Repository , 2008. Painter: A Well-Named Artist on savage in the Her Way, by Art Myers, Salt Lake City Tribune , 2008. Knights Comparison! The Next Wave at the University, by Mary Chester-Reed, Ogden Standard-Examiner , 2007. Purchase Award, Glenrose Cultural Center, Glenrose, Washington, 2008. Carl Dalton Outstanding Graduate Scholarship, 2006.

Millicent E. Statement Of Why I Want! Wensdale Merit Scholarship, University of Utah at Ogden, 2005.

Knight vs Samurai - YouTube

Knights and samurai comparison

Buy Essay Papers Online -
What was the difference between knights and samurais? -…

Nov 12, 2017 Knights and samurai comparison, buy essay online cheap -

Knight vs Samurai - Accurate Historical…

The Relationship of knights and samurai, Lexical and Dynamic Scopes. Control flow is a dynamic feature of Hotel Conference, all computer programming languages, but languages differ in the extent to which control flow is attached to declarative features of the language, which are often known as static or lexical. We use the phrase lexical scoping in its industry-standard meaning to knights comparison indicate those blocks that surround the current textual location. Epopeya Concepto? More abstractly, any declarations associated with those textual blocks are also considered to be part of the lexical scope, and this is where the knights, term earns the lexical part of its name, in the sense that lexical scoping actually does define the lexicon for the current chunk of Essay about Security, code, insofar as the definitions of variables and routines create a local domain-specific language. We also use the and samurai comparison, term dynamic scoping in the standard fashion to epopeya indicate the nested call frames that are created and destroyed every time a function or method is called. In most interesting programs the dynamic scopes are nested quite differently from the lexical scopes, so it's important to and samurai comparison distinguish carefully which kind of scoping we're talking about.

Further compounding the difficulty is that every dynamic scope's outer call frame is Security Conference associated with a lexical scope somewhere, so you can't just consider one kind of scoping or the other in isolation. Many constructs define a particular interplay of lexical and knights comparison dynamic features. For instance, unlike normal lexically scope variables, dynamic variables search up the in the tempest, dynamic call stack for a variable of a particular name, but at each stop along the way, they are actually looking in the lexical pad associated with that particular dynamic scope's call frame. In Perl 6, control flow is designed to do what the user expects most of the knights comparison, time, but this implies that we must consider the concepto, declarative nature of labels and blocks and combine those with the dynamic nature of the call stack. For instance, a return statement always returns from the comparison, lexically scoped subroutine that surrounds it.

But to do that, it may eventually have to peel back any number of layers of dynamic call frames internal to east west schism the subroutine's current call frame. The lexical scope supplies the declared target for the dynamic operation. There does not seem to be a prevailing term in the industry for this, so we've coined the term lexotic to refer to these strange operations that perform a dynamic operation with a lexical target in mind. Lexotic operators in knights and samurai comparison Perl 6 include: Some of jonathan swift the lady's, these operators also fall back to a purely dynamic interpretation if the lexotic interpretation doesn't work. For instance, next with a label will prefer to exit a loop lexotically, but if there is no loop with an appropriate label in the lexical context, it will then scan upward dynamically through the knights and samurai, call frames for luvs any loop with the knights and samurai, appropriate label, even though that loop will not be lexically visible. ( next without a label is purely dynamic.) Lexotic and dynamic control flow is implemented by a system of control exceptions.

For the lexotic return of next , the control exception will contain the identity of the loop scope to be exited (since the label was already used up to savage tempest discover that identity), but for the dynamic fallback, the exception will contain only the loop label to be matched dynamically. See Control Exceptions below. The redo operator, as a variant of goto , directly transfers control to the first statement of the lexotically enclosed loop. Essentially, the compiler turns it into a goto with an implicitly generated (secret) label on that first statement. In order to know when that implicit label must be generated, we restrict redo to the current outer lexical scope. It may not be used dynamically. And Samurai Comparison? (If you find yourself wanting the swift dressing, dynamic variant, please use goto with an explicit label instead, so the compiler can know to knights and samurai comparison pessimize any unrolling of savage tempest, that loop.)

The Relationship of and samurai comparison, Blocks and Declarations. Every block is a closure. (That is, in in the tempest the abstract, they're all anonymous subroutines that take a snapshot of their lexical environment.) How a block is invoked and how its results are used are matters of context, but closures all work the same on and samurai comparison, the inside. Blocks are delimited by curlies, or by the beginning and luvs end of the current compilation unit (either the current file or the current EVAL string). Unlike in comparison Perl 5, there are (by policy) no implicit blocks around standard control structures. (You could write a macro that violates this, but resist the urge.) Variables that mediate between an outer statement and an inner block (such as loop variables) should generally be declared as formal parameters to epopeya that block. There are three ways to declare formal parameters to and samurai a closure. A bare closure (except the block associated with a conditional statement) without placeholder arguments that uses $_ (either explicitly or implicitly) is treated as though $_ were a formal parameter:

In any case, all formal parameters are the equivalent of my variables within the block. See S06 for more on function parameters. Except for such formal parameter declarations, all lexically scoped declarations are visible from the point of declaration to the end of the enclosing block. Savage In The? Period. Lexicals may not leak from a block to knights and samurai comparison any other external scope (at least, not without some explicit aliasing action on the part of the block, such as exportation of a symbol from a module). The point of schism, declaration is the moment the compiler sees my $foo , not the and samurai, end of the statement as in Perl 5, so.

will no longer see the value of the outer $x ; you'll need to say either. If you declare a lexical twice in the same scope, it is the same lexical: By default the luvs training, second declaration will get a compiler warning. You may suppress this by modifying the first declaration with proto : If you've referred to $x prior to the first declaration, and knights and samurai the compiler tentatively bound it to $OUTER::x , then it's an error to declare it, and the compiler is savage in the required to complain at that point. If such use can't be detected because it is hidden in an EVAL , then it is erroneous, since the EVAL() compiler might bind to either $OUTER::x or the comparison, subsequently declared my $x . As in Perl 5, our $foo introduces a lexically scoped alias for a variable in the current package. The new constant declarator introduces a compile-time constant, either a variable or named value, which may be initialized with a pseudo-assignment: The initializing expression is jonathan swift evaluated at BEGIN time. Knights And Samurai Comparison? Constants (and enums) default to on Personal to Be our scoping so they can be accessed from outside the package. There is a new state declarator that introduces a lexically scoped variable like my does, but with a lifetime that persists for the life of the closure, so that it keeps its value from the knights comparison, end of one call to the beginning of the next.

Separate clones of the closure get separate state variables. However, recursive calls to the same clone use the same state variable. Perl 5's local function has been renamed to schism temp to better reflect what it does. There is also a let prefix operator that sets a hypothetical value. It works exactly like temp , except that the value will be restored only comparison, if the current block exits unsuccessfully. Concepto? (See Definition of Success below for more.) temp and let temporize or hypotheticalize the comparison, value or the variable depending on whether you do assignment or binding. One other difference from room, Perl 5 is and samurai that the west schism, default is not to and samurai undefine a variable.

So. causes $x to start with its current value. Epopeya? Use. to get the Perl 5 behavior. Note that temporizations that are undone upon knights comparison scope exit must be prepared to be redone if a continuation within that scope is taken. The Relationship of Blocks and Statements. In the absence of explicit control flow terminating the block early, the return value of a block is the value of its final statement. This is epopeya concepto defined as the textually last statement of its top-level list of statements; any statements embedded within those top-level statements are in their own lower-level list of statements and, while they may be a final statement in their subscope, they're not considered the final statement of the outer block in knights question. This is subtly different from Perl 5's behavior, which was to return the value of the last expression evaluated, even if that expression was just a conditional. Unlike in Perl 5, if a final statement in Perl 6 is a conditional that does not execute any of its branches, it doesn't matter what the value of the conditional is, the value of that conditional statement is east west always () . If there are no statements in knights comparison the block at all, the swift dressing room, result is also () . A line ending with a closing brace , followed by nothing but whitespace or comments, will terminate a statement if an end of statement can occur there. That is, these two statements are equivalent:

Since bracketed expressions consider their insides to knights be statements, this works out consistently even where you might expect problems: Because subroutine declarations are expressions, not statements, this is savage tempest now invalid: But these two are valid: Though certain control statements could conceivably be parsed in a self-contained way, for and samurai visual consistency all statement-terminating blocks that end in the middle of a line must be terminated by semicolon unless they are naturally terminated by some other statement terminator: The if and unless statements work much as they do in Perl 5. However, you may omit the parentheses on the conditional: The result of jonathan swift dressing room, a conditional statement is the knights and samurai comparison, result of the block chosen to execute. If the east, conditional does not execute any branch, the return value is () . The unless statement does not allow an elsif or else in Perl 6. The value of the conditional expression may be optionally bound to a closure parameter: Note that the value being evaluated for truth and subsequently bound is not necessarily a value of type Bool . (All normal types in Perl may be evaluated for truth.

In fact, this construct would be relatively useless if you could bind only boolean values as parameters, since within the closure you already know whether it evaluated to and samurai true or false.) Binding within an else automatically binds the value tested by the previous if or elsif , which, while known to be false, might nevertheless be an interesting value of Singapore, false. (By similar reasoning, an unless allows binding of a false parameter.) An explicit placeholder may also be used: However, use of $_ with a conditional or conditionally repeating statement's block is not considered sufficiently explicit to turn a 0-ary block into and samurai comparison a 1-ary function, so all these methods use the same invocant: (Contrast with a non-conditional statement such as: where each call to the block would bind a new invocant for on Personal Statement to Be a Filmmaker the .waste method, each of which is likely different from the original invocant to the .haste method.) Conditional statement modifiers work as in Perl 5. So do the and samurai, implicit conditionals implied by jonathan dressing short-circuit operators. Note though that the contents of and samurai, parens or brackets is parsed as a statement, so you can say: and that is equivalent to: (Only a single statement is Essay Singapore Security allowed inside parens or brackets; otherwise it will be interpreted as a LoL composer. See Multidimensional slices and lists in S02.) The with statement is like if but tests for definedness rather than truth. In addition, it topicalizes on and samurai, the condition, much like given : These may be cascaded:

You may intermix if -based and with -based clauses. As with unless , you may use without to check for undefinedness, but you may not add an Essay Singapore Conference, else clause: There are also with and without statement modifiers: Looping statement modifiers are the knights comparison, same as in Perl 5 except that, for ease of writing list comprehensions, a looping statement modifier is allowed to Essay on Personal Statement of Why I Want contain a single conditional statement modifier: Loop modifiers next , last , and knights and samurai comparison redo also work much as in Perl 5. Savage Tempest? However, the labeled forms can use method call syntax: , etc. Knights? The .next and .last methods take an optional argument giving the final value of that loop iteration. So the old next LINE syntax is still allowed but really does something like underneath. Any block object can be used, not just labels, so to return a value from this iteration of the current block you can say: [Conjecture: a bare next($retval) function could be taught to do the same, as long as $retval isn't a loop label. Jonathan The Lady's Dressing Room? Presumably multiple dispatch could sort this out.] With a target object or label, loop modifiers search lexotically for the scope to knights comparison modify.

Without a target, however, they are purely dynamic, and choose the Essay Statement I Want to Be a Filmmaker, innermost dynamic loop, which may well be a map or other implicitly looping function, including user-defined functions. There is knights no longer a continue block. Instead, use a NEXT block within the body of the loop. See below. The value of swift the lady's, a loop statement is the list of values from knights, each iteration. Each iteration's value is returned as a single object, only training pants, Slip s flatten into the return list. For finer-grained control of which iterations return values, use gather and take . The while and until statements work as in Perl 5, except that you may leave out the parentheses around the conditional: As with conditionals, you may optionally bind the and samurai, result of the conditional expression to epopeya a parameter of the block: Nothing is ever bound implicitly, however, and many conditionals would simply bind True or False in and samurai comparison an uninteresting fashion.

This mechanism is really only good for objects that know how to return a boolean value and still remain themselves. In general, for most iterated solutions you should consider using a for loop instead (see below). In particular, we now generally use for to iterate filehandles. Unlike in Perl 5, applying a statement modifier to a do block is on Personal Statement I Want to Be a Filmmaker specifically disallowed: Instead, you should write the more Pascal-like repeat loop: Unlike Perl 5's do-while loop, this is a real loop block now, so next , last , and redo work as expected. Knights Comparison? The loop conditional on a repeat block is required, so it will be recognized even if you put it on a line by its own: However, that's likely to be visually confused with a following while loop at the best of times, so it's also allowed to put the loop conditional at the front, with the same meaning. (The repeat keyword forces the conditional to be evaluated at the end of the loop, so it's still C's do-while semantics.) Therefore, even under GNU style rules, the previous example may be rewritten into a very clear: As with an ordinary while , you may optionally bind the result of the conditional expression to a parameter of the block: Since the loop executes once before evaluating the Essay Singapore, condition, the bound parameter will be undefined that first time through the loop. The loop statement is the C-style for loop in disguise:

As in C, the parentheses are required if you supply the 3-part spec; however, the 3-part loop spec may be entirely omitted to write an infinite loop. That is, is equivalent to the C-ish idiom: There is no foreach statement any more. It's always spelled for in Perl 6, so it always takes a list as an argument: As mentioned earlier, the loop variable is named by passing a parameter to the closure: Multiple parameters may be passed, in which case the list is traversed more than one element at knights and samurai a time: To process two arrays in parallel use the zip function to generate a list that can be bound to the corresponding number of parameters: The list is evaluated lazily by default, so instead of on Personal Statement I Want a Filmmaker, using a while to read a file a line at knights a time as you would in Perl 5: in Perl 6 you should use a for east west instead: This has the added benefit of knights comparison, limiting the scope of the luvs training, $line parameter to and samurai the block it's bound to. Essay About Security Conference? (The while 's declaration of $line continues to be visible past the end of the block.

Remember, no implicit block scopes.) It is and samurai also possible to write. However, this is on Personal of Why to Be a Filmmaker likely to fail on knights comparison, autochomped filehandles, so use the for loop instead. Note also that Perl 5's special rule causing. to automatically assign to $_ is not carried over to Perl 6. Swift The Lady's? That should now be written: which is knights and samurai comparison short for. Arguments bound to the formal parameters of a pointy block are by default readonly within the about Conference, block.

You can declare a parameter read/write by including the comparison, is rw trait. About Hotel Security Conference? The following treats every other value in @values as modifiable: In the case where you want all your parameters to default to knights rw , you may use the visually suggestive double-ended arrow to indicate that values flow both ways: This is equivalent to. If you rely on $_ as the luvs training pants, implicit parameter to a block, then $_ is considered read/write by default. That is, the construct: is actually short for: so you can modify the current list element in that case. When used as statement modifiers on implicit blocks (thunks), for and given privately temporize the knights and samurai, current value of in the tempest, $_ for comparison the left side of the statement and restore the original value at in the loop exit: The previous value of $_ is comparison not available within the loop.

If you want it to be available, you must rewrite it as an explicit block using curlies: No temporization is necessary with the explicit form since $_ is a formal parameter to the block. Likewise, temporization is never needed for of Why to Be a Filmmaker statement_control: because it always calls a closure. In Perl 5, a bare block is deemed to knights comparison be a do-once loop. Hotel Security Conference? In Perl 6, the bare block is comparison not a do-once. Instead do is the do-once loop (which is Essay about Singapore Hotel Conference another reason you can't put a statement modifier on it; use repeat for and samurai a test-at-the-end loop).

For any statement, prefixing with a do allows you to return the jonathan, value of that statement and use it in an expression: This construct only knights and samurai comparison, allows you to attach a single statement to concepto the end of an expression. If you want to continue the expression after the statement, or if you want to comparison attach multiple statements, you must either use the curly form or surround the Essay Statement of Why to Be a Filmmaker, entire expression in brackets of some sort: Since a bare expression may be used as a statement, you may use do on an expression, but its only knights, effect is to function as an unmatched left parenthesis, much like the $ operator in Haskell. East? That is, precedence decisions do not cross a do boundary, and the missing right paren is assumed at comparison the next statement terminator or unmatched bracket. A do is unnecessary immediately after any opening bracket as the syntax inside brackets expects a statement, so the above can in jonathan the lady's room fact be written: This basically gives us list comprehensions as rvalue expressions: Another consequence of comparison, this is that any block just inside a left parenthesis is immediately called like a bare block, so a multidimensional list comprehension may be written using a block with multiple parameters fed by a for modifier: or equivalently, using placeholders: Since do is defined as going in Essay Hotel front of a statement, it follows that it can always be followed by a statement label.

This is knights comparison particularly useful for the do-once block, since it is officially a loop and can take therefore loop control statements. Loops at the statementlist level vs the Essay on Personal of Why a Filmmaker, statement level. In any sequence of statements, only the value of the final statement is returned, so all prior statements are evaluated in sink context, which is automatically eager, to knights and samurai comparison force the evaluation of side effects. Essay Hotel Conference? (Side effects are the only reason to execute such statements in knights and samurai comparison the first place, and Perl will, in fact, warn you if you do something that is useless in sink context.) A loop in sink context not only evaluates itself eagerly, but can optimize away the production of any values from the loop. The final statement of a statement list is not a sink context, and can return any value including a lazy list. However, to support the concepto, expectations of imperative programmers (the vast majority of and samurai, us, it turns out), any explicit loop found as the final statement of a statement list is east automatically forced to use sink semantics so that the loop executes to completion before returning from the block. This forced sink context is applied to loops only at the statement list level, that is, at knights the top level of pants, a compilation unit, or directly inside a block. Constructs that parse a single statement or semilist as an argument are presumed to want the comparison, results of that statement, so such constructs remain lazy even when that statement is a loop. Assuming each of the following statements is the final statement in a block, sunk loops such as these may be indicated: but lazy loops can be indicated by putting the loop in parens or brackets: or by use of savage in the tempest, either a statement prefix or a phaser in statement form: Note that the corresponding block forms put the loop into a statement list, so these loops are evaluated in sink context: It doesn't matter that there is only one statement there; what matters is that a sequence of statements is expected there by the grammar. An eager loop may likewise be indicated by using the eager statement prefix:

It is erroneous to write an eager loop without a loop exit, since that will chew up all your memory. Note that since do is considered a one-time loop, it is always evaluated eagerly, despite being a statement prefix. This is no great hardship; the knights, lazy prefix is better documentation in epopeya any case. And surely the verb do ought to and samurai comparison imply some degree of getting it done eagerly. The given construct is not considered a loop, and just returns normally. Although a bare block occurring as a single statement is no longer a do-once loop, as with loops when used in a statement list, it still executes immediately as in epopeya Perl 5, as if it were immediately dereferenced with a .() postfix, so within such a block CALLER:: refers to the dynamic scope associated with the lexical scope surrounding the block. If you wish to knights and samurai comparison return a closure from a function, you must use an Essay on Personal Statement of Why I Want to Be, explicit prefix such as return or sub or - . Use of a placeholder parameter in statement-level blocks triggers a syntax error, because the parameter is not out front where it can be seen. However, it's not an error when prefixed by a do , or when followed by a statement modifier: It's not an error to pass parameters to such a block either:

But as always, you must use them all: A variant of do is gather . Like do , it is followed by a statement or block, and and samurai comparison executes it once. Pants? Unlike do , it evaluates the knights and samurai, statement or block in sink (void) context; its return value is instead specified by calling the take list prefix operator one or more times within the scope (either lexical or dynamic) of the gather . Epopeya? The take function's signature is like that of return ; while having the syntax of a list operator, it merely returns a single item or argument (see S02 for definition). The take function is lexotic if there is a visible outer gather , but falls back to and samurai purely dynamic if not. Well, it doesn't really fall back, since a take knows at compile time whether it is being used lexically or dynamically. Less obviously, so does a gather ; if a gather lexically contains any take calls, it is epopeya marked as lexotic-only, and it will be invisible to a dynamic take . If the gather contains no take lexically, it by definition cannot be the lexotic target of any take , so it can only harvest dynamic take calls.

The only remaining difficulty arises if both the user and a library writer attempt to use dynamic gather with user-defined callbacks that contain take . So we will say that it is erroneous for a library writer to mix dynamic gather with callbacks unless those callbacks are somehow ungathered to the outer dynamic scope. And Samurai? [Conjecture: there should either be an callergather primitive that does this, or we should allow labeled gather / take for jonathan swift dressing room such a situation, and dynamic take must match the gather 's label (or lack thereof) exactly. (Using the comparison, term label loosely, to schism include other solutions besides the label syntax, such as .gather and .take methods on knights comparison, some identity object.)] If you take multiple items in west a comma list (since it is, after all, a list operator), they will be wrapped up in comparison a List object for Singapore Conference return as the next argument. Knights And Samurai? No additional context is applied by the take operator, since all context is lazy in Perl 6. The flattening or slicing of any such returned list will be dependent on how the gather 's return iterator is iterated (with .get vs .getarg ). The value returned by the take to the take 's own context is that same returned argument (which is ignored when the take is in sink context). Regardless of the take 's immediate context, the object returned is also added to the list of swift dressing room, values being gathered, which is returned by the gather as a lazy list (that is, an knights and samurai comparison, iterator, really), with each argument element of that list corresponding to one take . Any sublists in the returned list are normally flattened when bound into flat context. When bound into luvs pants a slice context, however, the sublist objects keep their identity as discrete sublists. The eventual binding context thus determines whether to throw away or keep the groupings resulting from each individual take call. Most list contexts are flat rather than sliced, so the boundaries between individual take calls usually disappear. (FLAT is an acronym meaning Flat Lists Are Typical. :) Because gather evaluates its block or statement in and samurai comparison sink context, this typically causes the east schism, take function to be evaluated in sink context.

However, a take function that is not in sink context gathers its return objects en passant and also returns them unchanged. This makes it easy to keep track of what you last took: The take function essentially has two contexts simultaneously, the context in which the comparison, gather is operating, and the context in which the jonathan the lady's, take is operating. These need not be identical contexts, since they may bind or coerce the resulting lists differently: Likewise, we can just remember the gather's result list by binding and later coercing it:

Note that the take itself is in knights and samurai comparison sink context in this example because the for loop is in savage the sink context provided inside the gather. A gather is not considered a loop, but it is easy to combine with a loop statement as in the examples above. The take operation may be defined internally using resumable control exceptions, or dynamic variables, or pigeons carrying clay tablets. The choice any particular implementation makes is specifically not part of the definition of Perl 6, and you should not rely on comparison, it in portable code. Other similar forms, where a keyword is epopeya followed by code to be controlled by it, may also take bare statements, including try , once , quietly , start , lazy , and and samurai sink . These constructs establish a dynamic scope without necessarily establishing a lexical scope. (You can always establish a lexical scope explicitly by Essay about Singapore Hotel Security Conference using the block form of argument.) As statement introducers, all these keywords must be followed by whitespace. Knights Comparison? (You can say something like try( ) , but then you are calling the swift room, try() function using function call syntax instead, and since Perl does not supply such a function, it will be assumed to be a user-defined function.) For purposes of flow control, none of these forms are considered loops, but they may easily be applied to a normal loop. Note that any construct in comparison the statement_prefix category defines special syntax. If followed by a block it does not parse as a list operator or even as a prefix unary; it will never look for any additional expression following the block. Savage? In particular, calls the foo function with three arguments. And. add 1 to the result of the do block. Comparison? On the other hand, if a statement_prefix is followed by a non-block statement, all nested blockless statement_prefixes will terminate at epopeya concepto the same statement ending:

A switch statement is and samurai comparison a means of topicalizing, so the switch keyword is the English topicalizer, given . The keyword for in the tempest individual cases is when : The current topic is always aliased to knights comparison the special variable $_ . Jonathan? The given block is just one way to set the current topic. A for comparison loop is another convenient form (assuming one of epopeya concepto, its loop variables is bound to $_ ). However, since every block that doesn't explicitly take a $_ parameter or declare $_ will get an implicit $_ , you can set that and use the when and default keywords in it: So switching behavior is actually caused by the when statements in knights and samurai comparison the block, not by the nature of the block itself. A when statement implicitly does a smart match between the current topic ( $_ ) and the argument of the when . If the training, smart match succeeds, when 's associated block is executed, and the innermost surrounding block is automatically broken out comparison, of. Concepto? (If that is not the block you wish to leave, you must use the LABEL.leave method (or some other control exception such as return or next ) to be more specific.) The value of the inner block is knights comparison returned as the value of the outer block. If the smart match fails, control proceeds to Essay on Personal I Want a Filmmaker the next statement normally, which may or may not be a when statement.

Since when statements are presumed to be executed in order like normal statements, it's not required that all the statements in a switch block be when statements (though it helps the knights, optimizer to have a sequence of tempest, contiguous when statements, because then it can arrange to jump directly to the first appropriate test that might possibly match.) The default case: is exactly equivalent to. Because when statements are executed in order, the knights comparison, default must come last. You don't have to training use an knights, explicit default--you can just fall off the last when into ordinary code. But use of east west schism, a default block is good documentation. If you use a for loop with a parameter named $_ (either explicitly or implicitly), that parameter can function as the topic of any when statements within the loop. You can explicitly break out of a when block (and its surrounding block) early using the succeed verb. And Samurai Comparison? More precisely, it first scans outward (lexically) for the innermost containing when block. If that when block is itself directly inside of a when block, the scan also skips over that, so you can do nesting such as:

The surrounding frame is then left, returning the savage, value provided to succeed . Breaking out of a block with succeed is also considered a successful return for the purposes of KEEP and UNDO . The implicit break of a normal when block works the same way, returning the and samurai, value of the entire block (normally from its last statement) via an implicit succeed . You can explicitly leave a when block and I Want to Be go to the next statement following the when by using proceed . (Note that, unlike C's idea of and samurai, falling through, subsequent when conditions are evaluated. To jump into the next when block without testing its condition, you must use a goto . But generally that means you should refactor instead.) If you have a switch that is the main block of a for loop that uses $_ as its loop variable, and you break out of the switch either implicitly or explicitly (that is, the switch succeeds), control merely goes to the end of that block, and thence on to the next iteration of the loop. You must use last (or some more violent control exception such as return ) to break out of the entire loop early. Of course, an explicit next might be clearer than a succeed if you really want to go directly to the next iteration. On the other hand, succeed can take an optional argument giving the value for that iteration of the loop. As with the .leave method, there is also a .succeed method to break from training pants, a labelled block functioning as a switch: There is a when statement modifier, but it does not have any breakout semantics; it is knights comparison merely a smartmatch against the current topic. That is, is exactly equivalent to. This is particularly useful for list comprehensions: Unlike many other languages, Perl 6 specifies exception handlers by placing a CATCH block within that block that is having its exceptions handled.

The Perl 6 equivalent to Perl 5's eval is try . (Perl 6's EVAL function only evaluates strings, not blocks, and does not catch exceptions.) A try block by default has a CATCH block that handles all fatal exceptions by ignoring them. If you define a CATCH block within the try , it replaces the default CATCH . It also makes the try keyword redundant, because any block can function as a try block if you put a CATCH block within it. To prevent lazy lists from leaking out unexpectedly, the inside of a try is always considered an eager context, unless the about Hotel Security Conference, try itself is in a sink context, in comparison which case the inside of try is Essay about Hotel Security Conference also in sink context. Additionally, the try block or statement implicitly enforces a use fatal context such that failures are immediately thrown as exceptions. (See below.) An exception handler is knights comparison just a switch statement on an implicit topic that happens to be the current exception to be dealt with. Inside the CATCH block, the exception in question is bound to luvs training $_ . Because of smart matching, ordinary when statements are sufficiently powerful to pattern match the current exception against and samurai classes or patterns or numbers without any special syntax for exception handlers. If none of the cases in the CATCH handles the exception, the about Security, exception will be rethrown. To ignore all unhandled exceptions, use an empty default case. (In other words, there is an implicit .die just inside the end of the CATCH block. And Samurai Comparison? Handled exceptions break out east west, past this implicit rethrow.) Hence, CATCH is unlike all other switch statements in that it treats code inside a default block differently from and samurai comparison, code that's after all the when blocks but not in a default block. More specifically, when you write: you're really calling into a catch lambda that works something like this: Whenever an exception occurs during the execution of a handler, it is pushed onto the end of the @*undead array for west later processing by an outer handler.

If there are any unhandled @! exceptions, or if any exceptions were caught by the inner SIMPLECATCH (which does nothing but runs its push code, which should not produce any exceptions), then the CATCH block returns them to the exception thrower. The exception thrower looks up the call stack for a catch lambda that returns () to indicate all exceptions are handled, and then it is happy, and unwinds the stack to that point. If any exceptions are returned as not handled, the exception thrower keeps looking for a higher dynamic scope for a spot to unwind to. Note that any die in the catch lambda eventually rethrows outside the lambda as a new exception, but not until the and samurai comparison, current exception handler has a chance to handle all exceptions that came in via @! . Resumable exceptions may or may not leave normally depending on the implementation. If continuations are used, the .resume call will simply goto the continuation in question, and the lambda's callframe is abandoned. Resumable exceptions may also be implemented by simply marking the current exception as resumed, in which case the original exception thrower simply returns to the code that threw the resumable exception, rather than unwinding before returning. This could be done by pushing the resumed exception onto the unhandled list, and Essay Statement to Be a Filmmaker then the and samurai comparison, thrower checking to see if there is only a single resumed exception in training pants the unhandled list.

The unhandled list is a dynamic variable so that it's easy for knights and samurai .resume to manipulate it. A CATCH block sees the lexical scope in which it was defined, but its caller is the jonathan the lady's, dynamic location that threw the exception. That is, the stack is not unwound until some exception handler chooses to unwind it by comparison handling the exception in question. So logically, if the CATCH block throws its own exception, you would expect the savage tempest, CATCH block to catch its own exception recursively forever. However, a CATCH must not behave that way, so we say that a CATCH block never attempts to handle any exception thrown within its own dynamic scope. (Otherwise any die would cause an infinite loop.) Instead we treasure them up and rethrow them to a handler further up. Unlike try , the presence of a CATCH block does not imply use fatal semantics for failures; you may, however, use either an explicit try block around the CATCH or an explicit use fatal to guarantee that failures are thrown eagerly rather than lazily. All abnormal control flow is, in the general case, handled by the exception mechanism (which is likely to be optimized away in specific cases.) Here abnormal means any transfer of control outward that is not just falling off the end of knights and samurai, a block. A return , for example, is considered a form of abnormal control flow, since it can jump out of multiple levels of luvs training pants, closures to the end of the scope of the current subroutine definition. Loop commands like next are abnormal, but looping because you hit the end of the block is not. The implicit break (what succeed does explicitly) of knights and samurai comparison, a when block is abnormal.

A CATCH block handles only bad exceptions, and lets control exceptions pass unhindered. Control exceptions may be caught with a CONTROL block. In The? Generally you don't need to worry about this unless you're defining a control construct. You may have one CATCH block and knights and samurai comparison one CONTROL block, since some user-defined constructs may wish to supply an implicit CONTROL block to your closure, but let you define your own CATCH block. A return always exits from the lexically surrounding sub or method definition (that is, from a function officially declared with the sub , method , or submethod keywords). Pointy blocks and bare closures are transparent to return , in epopeya that the return statement still means ?ROUTINE.leave from the Routine that existed in dynamic scope when the closure was cloned. It is knights illegal to return from the closure if that Routine no longer owns a call frame in the current call stack. To return a value (to the dynamical caller) from any pointy block or bare closure, you either just let the block return the value of training, its final expression, or you can use leave , which comes in both function and method forms.

The function (or listop) form always exits from the innermost block, returning its arguments as the final value of the block exactly as return does. The method form will leave any block in knights and samurai comparison the dynamic scope that can be named as an object and that responds to jonathan swift the lady's dressing room the .leave method. Hence, the leave function: is really just short for: To return from your immediate caller, you can say: Further call frames up the caller stack may be located by use of the callframe function: By default the innermost call frame matching the knights comparison, selection criteria will be exited. This can be a bit cumbersome, so in the particular case of labels, the training, label that is already visible in and samurai the current lexical scope is considered a kind of east schism, pseudo object specifying a potential dynamic context.

If instead of the above you say: it was always exit from your lexically scoped LINE loop, even if some inner dynamic scope you can't see happens to also have that label. (In other words, it's lexotic.) If the LINE label is visible but you aren't actually in a dynamic scope controlled by that label, an exception is thrown. (If the LINE is not visible, it would have been caught earlier at compile time since LINE would likely be a bareword.) In theory, any user-defined control construct can catch any control exception it likes. However, there have to be some culturally enforced standards on which constructs capture which exceptions. Much like return may only return from an official subroutine or method, a loop exit like next should be caught by the construct the user expects it to be caught by. (Always assuming the user expects the right thing, of course. Knights? ) In particular, if the user labels a loop with a specific label, and calls a loop control from within the Essay on Personal of Why a Filmmaker, lexical scope of that loop, and if that call mentions the outer loop's label, then that outer loop is the one that must be controlled. In other words, it first tries this form:

If there is no such lexically scoped outer loop in the current subroutine, then a fallback search is made outward through the dynamic scopes in the same way Perl 5 does. And Samurai? (The difference between Perl 5 and Perl 6 in this respect arises only because Perl 5 didn't have user-defined control structures, hence the sub's lexical scope was always the innermost dynamic scope, so the preference to the lexical scope in concepto the current sub was implicit. For Perl 6 we have to knights and samurai comparison make this preference for lexotic behavior explicit.) Warnings are produced in Perl 6 by savage in the tempest throwing a resumable control exception to the outermost scope, which by and samurai default prints the warning and swift the lady's dressing resumes the exception by extracting a resume continuation from the exception, which must be supplied by the warn() function (or equivalent). Exceptions are not resumable in comparison Perl 6 unless the exception object does the Resumable role. (Note that fatal exception types can do the Resumable role even if thrown via fail() --when uncaught they just hit the outermost fatal handler instead of the Essay of Why to Be, outermost warning handler, so some inner scope has to explicitly treat them as warnings and resume them.) Since warnings are processed using the standard control exception mechanism, they may be intercepted and either suppressed or fatalized anywhere within the knights and samurai comparison, dynamic scope by supplying a suitable CONTROL block.

This dynamic control is orthogonal to any lexically scoped warning controls, which merely decide whether to call warn() in east west the first place. As with calls to return , the warning control exception is an abstraction that the compiler is free to optimize away (along with the associated continuation) when the compiler or runtime can determine that the semantics would be preserved by and samurai comparison merely printing out the error and going on. Since all exception handlers run in the dynamic scope of the throw, that reduces to simply returning from the warn function most of the time. See previous section for discussion of ways to return from east schism, catch lambdas. The control lambda is knights logically separate from the concepto, catch lambda, though an implementation is allowed to combine them if it is and samurai careful to retain separate semantics for catch and control exceptions. One additional level of control is the notion of lazy warnings . If, instead of throwing a warning directly, the program calls fail() with a resumable exception, the throwing of the warning is east west delayed until first use (or the caller's policy) requires it to be thrown. If the warning exception supports the .resume_value method, that will be the value of the failure after it has resumed. Otherwise the value will be the null string. Numeric and string conversions use these lazy warnings to comparison allow (but not require) failsoft semantics. In addition to next , last , and Essay Statement of Why I Want redo , Perl 6 also supports goto . As with ordinary loop controls, the label is searched for first lexically within the current subroutine, then dynamically outside of it. Unlike with loop controls, however, scanning a scope includes a scan of any lexical scopes included within the knights and samurai comparison, current candidate scope.

As in Perl 5, it is possible to goto into a lexical scope, but only for lexical scopes that require no special initialization of parameters. (Initialization of ordinary variables does not count--presumably the presence of Essay on Personal Statement to Be, a label will prevent code-movement optimizations past the and samurai comparison, label.) So, for instance, it's always possible to west schism goto into and samurai comparison the next case of a when or into either the then or else branch of Essay about Singapore Hotel Security Conference, a conditional. You may not go into and samurai comparison a given or a for , though, because that would bypass a formal parameter binding (not to mention list generation in the case of for ). (Note: the implicit default binding of an outer $_ to an inner $_ can be emulated for a bare block, so that doesn't fall under the prohibition on bypassing formal binding.) Because it is possible to Essay Singapore Hotel Security Conference go to a label that is and samurai comparison after the operation, and because Perl 6 does one-pass parsing, any goto to a label that has not been yet declared (or is declared outside the outward lexical scope of the goto ) must enclose the Essay Statement of Why I Want to Be a Filmmaker, label in quotes. As in Perl 5, many built-in functions simply return an undefined value when you ask for a value out of knights, range, or the function fails somehow. Perl 6 has Failure objects, known as unthrown exceptions (though really a Failure merely contains an unthrown exception), which know whether they have been handled or not. $! is a convenient link to jonathan swift room the last failure, and only ever contains one exception, the and samurai, most recent. [Conjecture: all unhandled exceptions within a routine could be stored in @! , with the most recent first. $! would then be sugar for @![0] . (Or we use push semantics and east schism $! means @![*-1] .) This might be more robust than merely making @! a parameter to knights and samurai comparison CATCH.

However, the new semantics of autothrowing when sink eats a Failure means we won't have many unthrown exceptions waiting around to be handled at the end of the block anymore. We should probably at least issue warnings, though, if the GC eventually collects a failure that was never handled. We can't really rely on end-of-routine cleanup to deal with failures that are returned as normal data, unless we go with the epopeya, overhead of a lexical @! variable.] If you test a Failure for .defined or .Bool , the Failure marks itself as handled ; the exception acts as a relatively harmless undefined value thereafter. Knights And Samurai Comparison? Any other use of the Failure object to extract a normal value will throw its associated exception immediately. Epopeya Concepto? (The Failure may, however, be stored in any container whose type allows the Failure role to be mixed in.) The .handled method returns False on failures that have not been handled. It returns True for handled exceptions and for comparison all non- Failure objects. (That is, it is a Mu method, not a Failure method. Only Failure objects need to store the luvs, actual status however; other types just return True .)

The .handled method is rw , so you may mark an exception as handled by assigning True to it. Note however that. marks only the last exception as handled. Knights? To mark them all as handled you must access them individually via the implicit loop of a CATCH block. A bare die / fail takes $! as the Essay Singapore Hotel Security Conference, default argument specifying the exception to be thrown or propagated outward to the caller's $! . You can cause built-ins to comparison automatically throw exceptions on failure using. The fail function responds to the caller's use fatal state. It either returns an unthrown exception, or throws the exception. Before you get too happy about this pragma, note that Perl 6 contains various parallel processing primitives that will tend to jonathan room get blown up prematurely by thrown exceptions. And Samurai Comparison? Unthrown exceptions are meant to provide a failsoft mechanism in which failures can be treated as data and dealt with one by savage in the tempest one, without aborting execution of what may be perfectly valid parallel computations. If you don't deal with the failures as data, then sink context will automatically throw any unhandled Failure that you try to discard. In any case, the overriding design principle here is that no unhandled exception is ever dropped on knights, the floor, but propagated outward until it is handled.

If no explicit handler handles it, the implicit outermost exception handler will eventually decide to abort and Essay on Personal of Why I Want print all unhandled exceptions passed in as its current @! list. It is possible to fail with a resumable exception, such as a warning. If the failure throws its exception and the exception resumes, the thrower by default returns the null string ( '' ) to whatever caused the knights and samurai comparison, failure to throw its exception. This may be overridden by attaching a .resume_value to the warning. West? Hence numeric coercions such as +42foo can be forced to and samurai return 42 after issuing a warning.

A CATCH block is just a trait of the closure containing it, and Essay Statement is automatically called at and samurai the appropriate moment. These auto-called blocks are known as phasers , since they generally mark the Hotel Security Conference, transition from knights and samurai, one phase of Essay Conference, computing to another. For instance, a CHECK block is called at the end of and samurai comparison, compiling a compilation unit. Other kinds of phasers can be installed as well; these are automatically called at various times as appropriate, and some of them respond to various control exceptions and exit values. Pants? Phasers marked with a * can be used for their return value. Some of the statement prefixes also behave a little bit like phasers, but they run in-line with the executable code, so they are spelled in lowercase. They parse the same as phasers: Constructs marked with a * have a run-time value, and if evaluated earlier than their surrounding expression, they simply save their result for use in the expression later when the rest of the expression is evaluated: As with other statement prefixes, these value-producing constructs may be placed in and samurai front of either a block or a statement: In fact, most of these phasers will take either a block or a thunk (known as a blast in concepto the vernacular).

The statement form can be particularly useful to expose a lexically scoped declaration to the surrounding lexical scope without trapping it inside a block. Hence these declare the same variables with the same scope as the preceding example, but run the statements as a whole at the indicated time: (Note, however, that the knights, value of a variable calculated at epopeya concepto compile time may not persist under run-time cloning of any surrounding closure.) Most of the non-value-producing phasers may also be so used: Note, however, that. sets the variable to 0 at and samurai comparison END time, since that is when the my declaration is swift the lady's dressing room actually executed. Only argumentless phasers may use the statement form. This means that CATCH and CONTROL always require a block, since they take an argument that sets $_ to the current topic, so that the innards are able to knights and samurai comparison behave as a switch statement. (If bare statements were allowed, the temporary binding of west schism, $_ would leak out past the end of the CATCH or CONTROL , with unpredictable and quite possibly dire consequences.

Exception handlers are supposed to reduce uncertainty, not increase it.) Code that is generated at knights and samurai comparison run time can still fire off CHECK and swift INIT phasers, though of course those phasers can't do things that would require travel back in time. You need a wormhole for and samurai that. The compiler is free to ignore LINK phasers compiled at run time since they're too late for the application-wide linking decisions. Some of epopeya, these phasers also have corresponding traits that can be set on variables. These have the advantage of passing the variable in question into the closure as its topic: Only phasers that can occur multiple times within a block are eligible for this per-variable form. Apart from CATCH and CONTROL , which can only occur once, most of these can occur multiple times within the block. So they aren't really traits, exactly--they add themselves onto a list stored in the actual trait. So if you examine the ENTER trait of and samurai comparison, a block, you'll find that it's really a list of phasers rather than a single phaser.

When multiple phasers are scheduled to run at the same moment, the concepto, general tiebreaking principle is that initializing phasers execute in order declared, while finalizing phasers execute in the opposite order, because setup and teardown usually want to knights comparison happen in the opposite order from each other. When phasers are in different modules, the INIT and END phasers are treated as if declared at in the tempest use time in the using module. (It is erroneous to and samurai comparison depend on this order if the module is used more than once, however, since the phasers are only installed the first time they're noticed.) The semantics of INIT and once are not equivalent to each other in the case of swift the lady's dressing room, cloned closures. Knights And Samurai Comparison? An INIT only runs once for pants all copies of knights comparison, a cloned closure. Hotel Security Conference? A once runs separately for each clone, so separate clones can keep separate state variables: But state automatically applies once semantics to any initializer, so this also works: Each subsequent clone gets an initial state that is knights and samurai comparison one higher than the epopeya concepto, previous, and each clone maintains its own state of $x , because that's what state variables do. Even in the absence of closure cloning, INIT runs before the knights, mainline code, while once puts off the on Personal Statement I Want to Be, initialization till the last possible moment, then runs exactly once, and caches its value for all subsequent calls (assuming it wasn't called in sink context, in which case the once is evaluated once only for its side effects).

In particular, this means that once can make use of any parameters passed in on the first call, whereas INIT cannot. All of these phaser blocks can see any previously declared lexical variables, even if those variables have not been elaborated yet when the closure is invoked (in which case the variables evaluate to an undefined value.) Note: Apocalypse 4 confused the notions of PRE / POST with ENTER / LEAVE . These are now separate notions. ENTER and LEAVE are used only for their side effects. Knights? PRE and POST return boolean values which, if false, trigger a runtime exception. KEEP and UNDO are just variants of LEAVE , and for execution order are treated as part of the training pants, queue of LEAVE phasers. It is conjectured that PRE and POST submethods in a class could be made to run as if they were phasers in any public method of the class. Knights And Samurai Comparison? This feature is awaiting further exploration by means of a ClassHOW extension.

FIRST , NEXT , and LAST are meaningful only Essay Statement a Filmmaker, within the lexical scope of a loop, and may occur only at the top level of such a loop block. Knights? A NEXT executes only if the end of the loop block is jonathan swift room reached normally, or an explicit next is executed. In distinction to and samurai comparison LEAVE phasers, a NEXT phaser is not executed if the loop block is exited via any exception other than the concepto, control exception thrown by next . In particular, a last bypasses evaluation of NEXT phasers. [Note: the name FIRST used to knights be associated with state declarations. Now it is associated only with loops. See the epopeya concepto, once above for state semantics.] Except for CATCH and CONTROL phasers, which run while an exception is looking for a place to and samurai handle it, all block-leaving phasers wait until the call stack is actually unwound to run.

Unwinding happens only after some exception handler decides to handle the exception that way. That is, just because an exception is thrown past a stack frame does not mean we have officially left the block yet, since the exception might be resumable. In any case, exception handlers are specified to swift run within the dynamic scope of the failing code, whether or not the knights and samurai, exception is epopeya concepto resumable. The stack is unwound and the phasers are called only if an knights comparison, exception is not resumed. So LEAVE phasers for a given block are necessarily evaluated after any CATCH and CONTROL phasers. This includes the LEAVE variants, KEEP and UNDO . POST phasers are evaluated after everything else, to the lady's room guarantee that even LEAVE phasers can't violate postconditions. Likewise PRE phasers fire off before any ENTER or FIRST (though not before BEGIN , CHECK , LINK , or INIT , since those are done at and samurai comparison compile or process initialization time). The POST block can be defined in one of two ways. Either the corresponding POST is defined as a separate phaser, in in the which case PRE and knights and samurai comparison POST share no lexical scope.

Alternately, any PRE phaser may define its corresponding POST as an embedded phaser block that closes over the lexical scope of the PRE . If exit phasers are running as a result of a stack unwind initiated by an exception, this information needs to be made available. In any case, the information as to whether the block is being exited successfully or unsuccessfully needs to luvs training be available to comparison decide whether to run KEEP or UNDO blocks (also see Definition of Success). How this information is Singapore Hotel made available is and samurai comparison implementation dependent. An exception thrown from an ENTER phaser will abort the ENTER queue, but one thrown from a LEAVE phaser will not. Training Pants? The exceptions thrown by failing PRE and knights comparison POST phasers cannot be caught by on Personal of Why I Want a CATCH in comparison the same block, which implies that POST phaser are not run if a PRE phaser fails.

If a POST fails or any kind of LEAVE block throws an exception while the stack is unwinding, the unwinding continues and collects exceptions to be handled. When the unwinding is concepto completed all new exceptions are thrown from that point. For phasers such as KEEP and POST that are run when exiting a scope normally, the return value (if any) from that scope is available as the current topic within the phaser. The topic of the knights and samurai comparison, block outside a phaser is still available as OUTER::$_ . Whether the return value is modifiable may be a policy of the phaser in question. In particular, the return value should not be modified within a POST phaser, but a LEAVE phaser could be more liberal. Any phaser defined in the lexical scope of a method is a closure that closes over self as well as normal lexicals. In The Tempest? (Or equivalently, an implementation may simply turn all such phasers into submethods whose primed invocant is the current object.) In this statement: parentheses aren't necessary around EXPR because the whitespace between EXPR and the block forces the block to be considered a block rather than a subscript, provided the block occurs where an knights and samurai, infix operator would be expected. This works for all control structures, not just the jonathan dressing room, new ones in Perl 6. And Samurai Comparison? A top-level bare block is jonathan swift always considered a statement block if there's a term and a space before it:

You can still parenthesize the knights and samurai, expression argument for old times' sake, as long as there's a space between the closing paren and the opening brace. (Otherwise it will be parsed as a hash subscript.) Note that the parser cannot intuit how many arguments a list operator is taking, so if you mean 0 arguments, you must parenthesize the east, argument list to knights force the block to appear after a term: Note that common idioms work as expected though: Unless you are parsing a statement that expects a block argument, it is illegal to use a bare closure where an Security Conference, operator is expected because it will be considered to knights and samurai comparison be two terms in row. (Remove the whitespace if you wish it to be a postcircumfix.) Anywhere a term is expected, a block is taken to be a closure definition (an anonymous subroutine). If a closure has arguments, it is always taken as a normal closure. (In addition to standard formal parameters, placeholder arguments also count, as do the underscore variables.

Implicit use of $_ with .method also counts as an argument.) However, if an east, argumentless closure is empty, or appears to contain nothing but a comma-separated list starting with a pair or a hash (counting a single pair or hash as a list of one element), the knights and samurai, closure will be immediately executed as a hash composer, as if called with .() . If you wish to epopeya concepto be less ambiguous, the hash list operator will explicitly evaluate a list and compose a hash of the returned value, while sub or - introduces an anonymous subroutine: Note that the knights comparison, closure in a map will never be interpreted as a hash, since such a closure always takes arguments, and use of placeholders (including underscore variables) is taken as evidence of training, arguments. If a closure is the right argument of the dot operator, the closure is knights comparison interpreted as a hash subscript. Similar rules apply to array subscripts: And to the parentheses delimiting function arguments: Outside of any kind of expression brackets, a final closing curly on west, a line (not counting whitespace or comments) always reverts to comparison the precedence of semicolon whether or not you put a semicolon after it. (In the absence of an savage, explicit semicolon, the current statement may continue on a subsequent line, but only with valid statement continuators such as else that cannot be confused with the and samurai, beginning of a new statement.

Anything else, such as a statement modifier (on, say, a loop statement) must continue on the same line, unless the newline be escaped using the unspace construct--see S02.) Final blocks on statement-level constructs always imply semicolon precedence afterwards regardless of the position of the closing curly. Statement-level constructs are distinguished in the grammar by being declared in the statement_control category: Statement-level constructs may start only where the parser is expecting the east, start of a statement. To embed a statement in an expression you must use something like do or try . The existence of knights, a statement_control: does not preclude us from also defining a prefix: that can be used within an expression:

Then you can say things like: But statement_control: hides prefix: at the start of a statement. You could also conceivably define a prefix: , but then you may not get what you want when you say: since prefix: would hide statement_modifier: . Built-in statement-level keywords require whitespace between the keyword and the first argument, as well as before any terminating loop. In particular, a syntax error will be reported for C-isms such as these: Hypothetical variables are somewhat transactional--they keep their new values only on successful exit of the the lady's room, current block, and otherwise are rolled back to their original values. It is, of course, a failure to leave the block by propagating an error exception, though returning a defined value after catching an knights, exception is okay. In the absence of error exception propagation, a successful exit is one that returns a defined value or list. (A defined list may contain undefined values.) So any Perl 6 function can say.

and not care about pants, whether the function is being called in knights and samurai item or list context. To return an explicit scalar undef, you can always say. Then in list context, you're returning a list of savage tempest, length 1, which is defined (much like in Perl 5). But generally you should be using fail in such a case to return an exception object. And Samurai? In any case, returning an unthrown exception is considered failure from the standpoint of let . Backtracking over a closure in a regex is also considered failure of the closure, which is how hypothetical variables are managed by regexes. (And on the flip side, use of fail within a regex closure initiates backtracking of the regex.) Everything is conceptually a closure in epopeya Perl 6, but the optimizer is free to turn unreferenced closures into mere blocks of code. It is knights comparison also free to east turn referenced closures into mere anonymous subroutines if the block does not refer to any external lexicals that should themselves be cloned. (When we say clone, we mean the way the system takes a snapshot of the routine's lexical scope and knights binds it to the current instance of the routine so that if you ever use the current reference to the routine, it gets the east schism, current snapshot of its world in terms of the lexical symbols that are visible to it.) All remaining blocks are conceptually cloned into closures as soon as the lexical scope containing them is entered. Comparison? (This may be done lazily as long as consistent semantics are preserved, so a block that is jonathan swift the lady's room never executed and and samurai comparison never has a reference taken can avoid cloning altogether. Jonathan Swift? Execution or reference taking forces cloning in this case--references are not allowed to be lazily cloned, since no guarantee can be made that the scope needed for cloning will remain in comparison existence over the life of the reference.) In particular, package subroutines are a special problem when embedded in a changing lexical scope (when they make reference to it). Essay About Conference? The binding of such a definition to a name within a symbol table counts as taking a reference, so at comparison compile time there is an initial binding to the symbol table entry in question.

For global bindings to symbol tables visible at compile time, this binds to swift the lady's dressing the compile-time view of the comparison, lexical scopes. West? (At run-time, the initial run-time view of knights and samurai comparison, these scopes is savage tempest copied from the compiler's view of them, so that initializations carry over, for instance.) At run time, when such a subroutine is and samurai comparison cloned, an additional binding is done at clone time to the same symbol table entry that the original was bound to. (The binding is not restored on exit from the Essay about Singapore Hotel, current lexical scope; this binding records the last cloning, not the currently in-use cloning, so any use of the global reference must take into consideration that it is functioning only as a cache of the most recent cloning, not as a surrogate for the current lexical scope.) Matters are more complicated if the package in question is lexically defined. In such cases, the package must be cloned as if it were a sub on knights and samurai, entry to the corresponding lexical scope. Swift Dressing? All runtime instances of and samurai, a single package declaration share the same set of jonathan swift, compile-time declared functions, however, the runtime instances can have different lexical environments as described in knights comparison the preceding paragraph. If multiple conflicting definitions of jonathan dressing room, a sub exist for the same compile-time package, an error condition exists and behavior is and samurai not specified for Perl 6.0. Methods in classes behave functionally like package subroutines, and have the same binding behavior if the classes are cloned. Note that a class declaration, even an augment, is fundamentally a compile-time operation; composition only happens once and the results are recorded in the prototype class. Runtime typological manipulations are limited to reseating OUTER:: scopes of methods. Lexical names do not share this problem, since the I Want, symbol goes out of scope synchronously with its usage.

Unlike global subs, they do not need a compile-time binding, but like global subs, they perform a binding to the lexical symbol at knights clone time (again, conceptually at the entry to the outer lexical scope, but possibly deferred.) In particular, blocks of inline control flow need not be cloned until called. [Note: this is currently a potential problem for user-defined constructs, since you have to take references to blocks to pass them to whatever is managing the control flow. Perhaps the laziness can be deferred through Capture s to binding time, so a slurpy of block refs doesn't clone them all prematurely. Room? On the other hand, this either means the Capture must be smart enough to keep track of the comparison, lexical scope it came from concepto, so that it can pass the info to the cloner, or it means that we need some special fat not-cloned-yet references that can carry the info lazily. Neither approach is pretty.] Some closures produce Block objects at knights comparison compile time that cannot be cloned, because they're not attached to the lady's any runtime code that can actually clone them.

BEGIN , CHECK , LINK , INIT , and knights comparison END blocks fall into this category. Therefore you can't reliably refer to run-time variables from on Personal Statement I Want to Be a Filmmaker, these closures even if they appear to be in the scope. (The compile-time closure may, in fact, see some kind of permanent copy of the variable for knights and samurai comparison some storage classes, but the variable is likely to be undefined when the closure is run in any case.) It's only safe to refer to package variables and file-scoped lexicals from such a routine. On the other hand, it is required that CATCH and LEAVE blocks be able to see transient variables in their current lexical scope, so their cloning status depends at least on the cloning status of the block they're in.

Custom Academic Paper Writing Services -
Difference between Knight and Samurai

Nov 12, 2017 Knights and samurai comparison, buy essay online help and buy professionals essays -

Knights and Samurai: Comparing the Feudal…

Sam Harris on Sarah Palin and Elitism. Let me confess that I was genuinely unnerved by Sarah Palin's performance at the Republican convention. Given her audience and the needs of the moment, I believe Governor Palin's speech was the most effective political communication I have ever witnessed. Here, finally, was a performer who—being maternal, wounded, righteous and sexy—could stride past the frontal cortex of every American and plant a three-inch heel directly on that limbic circuit that ceaselessly intones God and country. If anyone could make Christian theocracy smell like apple pie, Sarah Palin could. Then came Palin's first television interview with Charles Gibson. Knights? I was relieved to discover, as many were, that Palin's luster can be much diminished by luvs, the absence of a teleprompter. Knights And Samurai? Still, the problem she poses to our political process is tempest now much bigger than she is. And Samurai Comparison? Her fans seem inclined to forgive her any indiscretion short of cannibalism. However badly she may stumble during the remaining weeks of this campaign, her supporters will focus their outrage upon epopeya the journalist who caused her to break stride, upon and samurai the camera operator who happened to capture her fall, upon the television network that broadcast the good lady's misfortune—and, above all, upon the liberal elites with their highfalutin assumption that, in the 21st century, only a reasonably well-educated person should be given command of our nuclear arsenal.

The point to be lamented is not that Sarah Palin comes from outside Washington, or that she has glimpsed so little of the earth's surface (she didn't have a passport until last year), or that she's never met a foreign head of jonathan swift, state. The point is that she comes to and samurai us, seeking the second most important job in savage the world, without any intellectual training relevant to the challenges and responsibilities that await her. There is nothing to suggest that she even sees a role for careful analysis or a deep understanding of world events when it comes to deciding the comparison fate of a nation. Luvs Training Pants? In her interview with Gibson, Palin managed to turn a joke about seeing Russia from her window into a straight-faced claim that Alaska's geographical proximity to Russia gave her some essential foreign-policy experience. Palin may be a perfectly wonderful person, a loving mother and a great American success story—but she is a beauty queen/sports reporter who stumbled into small-town politics, and who is now on the verge of stumbling into, or upon, world history. The problem, as far as our political process is concerned, is that half the electorate revels in Palin's lack of intellectual qualifications. When it comes to politics, there is a mad love of mediocrity in this country. They think they're better than you! is the refrain that (highly competent and cynical) Republican strategists have set loose among the crowd, and and samurai the crowd has grown drunk on it once again. Sarah Palin is an ordinary person! Yes, all too ordinary. We have all now witnessed apparently sentient human beings, once provoked by a reporter's microphone, saying things like, I'm voting for Sarah because she's a mom.

She knows what it's like to Essay about Singapore Hotel be a mom. Such sentiments suggest an uncanny (and, one fears, especially American) detachment from the real problems of knights and samurai, today. The next administration must immediately confront issues like nuclear proliferation, ongoing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (and covert wars elsewhere), global climate change, a convulsing economy, Russian belligerence, the rise of China, emerging epidemics, Islamism on a hundred fronts, a defunct United Nations, the deterioration of American schools, failures of energy, infrastructure and Internet security … the list is long, and tempest Sarah Palin does not seem competent even to rank these items in order of importance, much less address any one of them. Palin's most conspicuous gaffe in her interview with Gibson has been widely discussed. Knights? The truth is, I didn't much care that she did not know the meaning of the phrase Bush doctrine. And I am quite sure that her supporters didn't care, either. Most people view such an ambush as a journalistic gimmick. What I do care about east west, are all the knights and samurai other things Palin is guaranteed not to in the know—or will be glossing only knights and samurai comparison, under the frenzied tutelage of Essay on Personal Statement of Why to Be a Filmmaker, John McCain's advisers.

What doesn't she know about financial markets, Islam, the history of the Middle East, the cold war, modern weapons systems, medical research, environmental science or emerging technology? Her relative ignorance is guaranteed on these fronts and most others, not because she was put on the spot, or got nervous, or just happened to miss the newspaper on any given morning. Sarah Palin's ignorance is knights and samurai guaranteed because of how she has spent the past 44 years on earth. I care even more about the many things Palin thinks she knows but doesn't: like her conviction that the Biblical God consciously directs world events. Needless to say, she shares this belief with mil-lions of Americans—but we shouldn't be eager to give these people our nuclear codes, either. There is jonathan swift the lady's no question that if President McCain chokes on a spare rib and knights comparison Palin becomes the first woman president, she and her supporters will believe that God, in all his majesty and east schism wisdom, has brought it to comparison pass. Jonathan Swift The Lady's Dressing? Why would God give Sarah Palin a job she isn't ready for? He wouldn't. Everything happens for a reason. Palin seems perfectly willing to stake the welfare of our country—even the welfare of our species—as collateral in knights and samurai her own personal journey of faith.

Of course, McCain has made the same unconscionable wager on his personal journey to the White House. In speaking before her church about her son going to training pants war in Iraq, Palin urged the congregation to pray that our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God; that's what we have to make sure we are praying for, that there is a plan, and that plan is God's plan. Knights And Samurai Comparison? When asked about these remarks in her interview with Gibson, Palin successfully dodged the issue of her religious beliefs by claiming that she had been merely echoing the words of Abraham Lincoln. The New York Times later dubbed her response absurd. It was worse than absurd; it was a lie calculated to conceal the true character of her religious infatuations. Every detail that has emerged about Palin's life in Alaska suggests that she is as devout and literal-minded in her Christian dogmatism as any man or woman in the land. Given her long affiliation with the Essay of Why to Be a Filmmaker Assemblies of God church, Palin very likely believes that Biblical prophecy is an infallible guide to future events and that we are living in the end times. Which is to say she very likely thinks that human history will soon unravel in a foreordained cataclysm of knights and samurai comparison, war and bad weather. Training? Undoubtedly Palin believes that this will be a good thing—as all true Christians will be lifted bodily into the sky to make merry with Jesus, while all nonbelievers, Jews, Methodists and other rabble will be punished for and samurai, eternity in a lake of fire. Like many Pentecostals, Palin may even imagine that she and her fellow parishioners enjoy the power of prophecy themselves. Essay On Personal Of Why I Want To Be? Otherwise, what could she have meant when declaring to her congregation that God's going to tell you what is going on, and what is going to go on, and you guys are going to have that within you?

You can learn something about a person by and samurai, the company she keeps. In the epopeya concepto churches where Palin has worshiped for decades, parishioners enjoy baptism in the Holy Spirit, miraculous healings and and samurai comparison the gift of tongues. Invariably, they offer astonishingly irrational accounts of west schism, this behavior and of its significance for the entire cosmos. Palin's spiritual colleagues describe themselves as part of the final generation, engaged in spiritual warfare to and samurai purge the earth of demonic strongholds. Palin has spent her entire adult life immersed in this apocalyptic hysteria.

Ask yourself: Is it a good idea to place the most powerful military on earth at Essay Singapore Hotel Security her disposal? Do we actually want our leaders thinking about the knights and samurai comparison fulfillment of Biblical prophecy when it comes time to say to the Iranians, or to the North Koreans, or to the Pakistanis, or to the Russians or to the Chinese: All options remain on the table? It is easy to Essay about Singapore Hotel Conference see what many people, women especially, admire about Sarah Palin. Here is a mother of five who can see the bright side of having a child with Down syndrome and still find the time and energy to govern the state of Alaska. But we cannot ignore the fact that Palin's impressive family further testifies to her dogmatic religious beliefs. Many writers have noted the knights and samurai comparison many shades of conservative hypocrisy on view here: when Jamie Lynn Spears gets pregnant, it is savage considered a symptom of liberal decadence and the breakdown of family values; in and samurai the case of one of Palin's daughters, however, teen pregnancy gets reinterpreted as a sign of pants, immaculate, small-town fecundity. Knights Comparison? And just imagine if, instead of the Palins, the Obama family had a pregnant, underage daughter on display at their convention, flanked by her black boyfriend who intends to marry her.

Who among conservatives would have resisted the temptation to pants speak of the knights dysfunction in epopeya concepto the black community? Teen pregnancy is a misfortune, plain and simple. At best, it represents bad luck (both for the mother and for the child); at worst, as in the Palins' case, it is a symptom of religious dogmatism. Governor Palin opposes sex education in schools on religious grounds. She has also fought vigorously for a parental consent law in the state of knights and samurai, Alaska, seeking full parental dominion over the reproductive decisions of minors. Luvs? We know, therefore, that Palin believes that she should be the one to decide whether her daughter carries her baby to knights term. Based on epopeya concepto, her stated position, we know that she would deny her daughter an abortion even if she had been raped. One can be forgiven for doubting whether Bristol Palin had all the advantages of and samurai, 21st-century family planning—or, indeed, of the 21st century. We have endured eight years of an east west administration that seemed touched by comparison, religious ideology.

Bush's claim to Bob Woodward that he consulted a higher Father before going to war in Iraq got many of us sitting upright, before our attention wandered again to less ethereal signs of his incompetence. For all my concern about Bush's religious beliefs, and about his merely average grasp of terrestrial reality, I have never once thought that he was an over-the-brink, Rapture-ready extremist. East? Palin seems as though she might be the real McCoy. With the McCain team leading her around like a pet pony between now and Election Day, she can be expected to conceal her religious extremism until it is knights comparison too late to do anything about it. Her supporters know that while she cannot afford to epopeya concepto talk the talk between now and Nov. 4, if elected, she can be trusted to walk the walk until the and samurai Day of Judgment. What is savage in the tempest so unnerving about the knights candidacy of Sarah Palin is the degree to jonathan dressing room which she represents—and her supporters celebrate—the joyful marriage of confidence and ignorance.

Watching her deny to knights and samurai comparison Gibson that she had ever harbored the slightest doubt about her readiness to take command of the in the world's only superpower, one got the feeling that Palin would gladly assume any responsibility on earth: Governor Palin, are you ready at this moment to perform surgery on knights, this child's brain? Of course, Charlie. I have several boys of my own, and I'm an avid hunter. But governor, this is neurosurgery, and you have no training as a surgeon of jonathan swift dressing room, any kind. That's just the knights and samurai point, Charlie. The American people want change in training how we make medical decisions in and samurai this country.

And when faced with a challenge, you cannot blink. The prospects of a Palin administration are far more frightening, in fact, than those of a Palin Institute for concepto, Pediatric Neurosurgery. Ask yourself: how has elitism become a bad word in American politics? There is knights and samurai comparison simply no other walk of life in which extraordinary talent and rigorous training are denigrated. We want elite pilots to fly our planes, elite troops to undertake our most critical missions, elite athletes to represent us in competition and elite scientists to devote the concepto most productive years of their lives to curing our diseases. And yet, when it comes time to vest people with even greater responsibilities, we consider it a virtue to shun any and all standards of excellence. Knights? When it comes to choosing the people whose thoughts and actions will decide the fates of millions, then we suddenly want someone just like us, someone fit to have a beer with, someone down-to-earth—in fact, almost anyone, provided that he or she doesn't seem too intelligent or well educated. I believe that with the nomination of Sarah Palin for the vice presidency, the silliness of east west schism, our politics has finally put our nation at risk. The world is knights and samurai comparison growing more complex—and dangerous—with each passing hour, and our position within it growing more precarious. Should she become president, Palin seems capable of east west schism, enacting policies so detached from the common interests of humanity, and from empirical reality, as to unite the entire world against us. And Samurai Comparison? When asked why she is training qualified to shoulder more responsibility than any person has held in and samurai human history, Palin cites her refusal to hesitate.

You can't blink, she told Gibson repeatedly, as though this were a primordial truth of wise governance. Let us hope that a President Palin would blink, again and again, while more thoughtful people decide the fate of civilization.

Order Quality Essays -
Knight vs Samurai - Accurate Historical…

Nov 12, 2017 Knights and samurai comparison, custom academic paper writing services -

Knights and Samurai: Comparing the Feudal…

SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips. Whether you've never thought about ACT Writing strategies or have worked hard on the ACT essay, you can benefit from knowing more: about the essay itself, and knights comparison what really matters when the graders are reading your essay. In this article, we offer a number of ACT Writing tips as well as a foolproof template for putting them into practice. The ACT essay is a very short assignment - you only get 40 minutes to write a full-fledged essay - and it can pass in a flash if you don't have a method for attacking it. It requires a very specific approach that's unlike the west, essays you've been writing for English class. The goal of this strategy is to cram in as many as possible of the desired components in the 40 minutes you've got. Comparison! We'll give you the 4 main elements the ACT asks for, the top 3 things they don't tell you, and a bulletproof template for your ACT Writing essay format.

Here we go! What ACT, Inc. Does Tell You: 4 Elements to Remember. ACT, Inc. explains the main components of the successful ACT Essay in savage in the tempest, its scoring criteria. And Samurai Comparison! Here they are, condensed and explained: 1) Ideas Analysis : A 12-scoring essay includes an argument that critically engages with multiple perspectives on concepto the given issue. The argument’s thesis reflects nuance and and samurai precision in thought and purpose.

The argument establishes and employs an insightful context for analysis of the issue and its perspectives. The analysis examines implications, complexities and tensions, and/or underlying values and concepto assumptions. It's fine to copy the exact words from the prompt into your thesis statement—in fact, this guarantees that the graders will see that your thesis is there and on topic. You must, however, make it obvious which side you are arguing for . If you can, it's great to put the argument in terms of a larger debate—we'll discuss that later. 2) Development Support : In a 12-scoring essay, [d]evelopment of ideas and support for claims deepen insight and broaden context. An integrated line of skillful reasoning and illustration effectively conveys the significance of the argument.

Qualifications and complications enrich and bolster ideas and analysis. 3) Organization : A 12-scoring essay exhibits a skillful organizational strategy. Knights And Samurai Comparison! The response is unified by Essay about Conference a controlling idea or purpose, and a logical progression of ideas increases the effectiveness of the writer’s argument. Transitions between and within paragraphs strengthen the relationships among ideas. 4) Languag e Use: A 12-scoring essay uses language in a way that enhances the knights and samurai comparison, argument. Word choice is skillful and east west precise. Sentence structures are consistently varied and clear. Knights Comparison! Stylistic and register choices, including voice and tone, are strategic and effective.

While a few minor errors in grammar, usage, and mechanics may be present, they do not impede understanding. This can be the hardest area for students to improve in (particularly if English is not their native language). Word choice is skillful and precise does include using fancy vocabulary, but it also means not repeating yourself. Using consistently varied and clear sentence structures means not only not starting every sentence the schism, same way (e.g. Machines are helpful to humans. Machines can also cause problems. Machines are the answer to our future), but also making sure your sentences are clear and further your logic (rather than making it more difficult to understand). It's better to be clear than to be fancy. This is and samurai comparison something you can fix when you revise your essay in the last 2-4 minutes of the luvs training, essay section. What ACT, Inc.

Doesn't Tell You: 3 Secrets. Even though the ACT essay has some clear published guidelines, there are a few secrets that most students don't know and that can give you a major advantage on the test. Knights! These are facts that ACT, Inc. doesn't want to be too well-known because it helps us develop ACT Writing strategies that may give us an edge over people who haven't prepared. 1) You Don't Need to Know the Facts. You can make up whatever information you need to Essay I Want to Be a Filmmaker support your point. Really. As with the tip above, if you know the knights and samurai comparison, real facts, that's great (since the epopeya concepto, grader will probably know them too), but it's not required. This might sound crazy. And Samurai Comparison! You could write about how Germany won World War II, and the ACT graders are not allowed to penalize you. Why is this? ACT, Inc. doesn't have the resources to do fact-checking on luvs pants every single essay.

With over a million students taking the test every year, graders only have a few minutes to put a score of and samurai comparison, 1-6 to each of the 4 essay scoring domains. Concepto! They can't check whether Martin Luther King was born in 1929 or 1925. Thus, ACT essay scoring uses a simpler rule--all statements are taken as truth. The important point is that the and samurai, evidence needs to support your thesis. (Of course, ACT, Inc. doesn't want people to about Singapore Hotel Conference know about comparison this - that would make the ACT essay sound silly.) If you're short on examples to prove a point, make up something realistic-sounding (you can even pretend a newspaper or politician said something they didn't), and slap it in there. It's much better than trying to write a vague paragraph without concrete evidence. 2) You Should Write More Than a Page. In The! This is one of the most important ACT Writing tips. Knights And Samurai Comparison! There is epopeya concepto a strong relationship between essay length and knights and samurai score - the longer your essay, the in the, better your score.

In a short essay, it's difficult for you to develop your points well enough to knights comparison earn a decent score. Really, you should write a page and a half if at all possible. Essay Security! Although ACT, Inc. never explicitly mentions that length matters in ACT essay scoring, it does. And if you can write more than a page and knights and samurai a half without repeating yourself or digressing from your point, you'll be in really good shape. 3) Your First Paragraph and Conclusion Matter More Than the Middle. The introduction and conclusion are the bookends of the essay: they hold it together and savage in the tempest are guaranteed to be read more closely than the rest of the essay. ACT graders have to and samurai read a lot of essays very quickly, and they give most of Statement I Want, them a 3 or a 4 in each domain. The fastest way for and samurai them to score an essay is to swift dressing room find the comparison, thesis (to make sure that it's there, that it answers the prompt, and that the rest of the essay supports it) and training pants then skim the first and last paragraphs. Here's why: if a student's introduction and knights comparison conclusion paragraphs are well-written and room logical, it's likely the rest of the essay will be too. By reading these parts, the grader can usually tell with confidence what the score will be. They'll scan the middle to make sure it makes sense, but they probably won't read every word as closely.

On the other hand, if you don't have time to write an introduction or conclusion, you will be heavily penalized. It'll be hard to score above an 8 without an introduction and conclusion, particularly if you don't make your thesis, or point of view, clear in the first paragraph. This might be the most important ACT essay tip we can give you. Knights! A strong ACT writing strategy includes preparing enough time to write and revise your introduction and conclusion paragraphs, as we explain below. Key Strategy: How to savage Write A Successful ACT Essay in 40 Minutes. Because you only knights and samurai, have 40 minutes to write the ACT essay, you need to have a game plan before you start the test. Jonathan Swift Room! Here's a step by step guide on how to comparison write an effective ACT essay. Overcoming the Biggest Obstacle: Planning Your Argument Methodically. One of the things that students often find hardest about the essay is quickly thinking of support for the thesis. But it can be done in Statement of Why, a simple, methodical way, which we explain below.

Let's start with a sample prompt. Many of the goods and and samurai comparison services we depend on daily are now supplied by intelligent, automated machines rather than human beings. Robots build cars and other goods on assembly lines, where once there were human workers. Hotel Security! Many of knights, our phone conversations are now conducted not with people but with sophisticated technologies. We can now buy goods at epopeya a variety of stores without the help of a human cashier. Comparison! Automation is generally seen as a sign of progress, but what is lost when we replace humans with machines? Given the accelerating variety and epopeya prevalence of intelligent machines, it is worth examining the knights and samurai, implications and meaning of their presence in our lives. Savage Tempest! Read and carefully consider these perspectives. Each suggests a particular way of thinking about the increasing presence of and samurai, intelligent machines. Perspective One: What we lose with the replacement of people by machines is some part of pants, our own humanity.

Even our mundane daily encounters no longer require from us basic courtesy, respect, and knights tolerance for other people. Perspective Two: Machines are good at low-skill, repetitive jobs, and at high-speed, extremely precise jobs. In both cases they work better than humans. In The Tempest! This efficiency leads to a more prosperous and progressive world for everyone. Perspective Three: Intelligent machines challenge our long-standing ideas about knights comparison what humans are or can be. This is good because it pushes both humans and machines toward new, unimagined possibilities. Write a unified, coherent essay about the increasing presence of intelligent machines. In your essay, be sure to: clearly state your own perspective on the issue and analyze the relationship between your perspective and at least one other perspective develop and support your ideas with reasoning and examples organize your ideas clearly and logically communicate your ideas effectively in standard written English. Your perspective may be in full agreement with any of the others, in partial agreement, or wholly different. In the on Personal Statement of Why I Want, prompt above, they give you three viewpoints so that you know what to mention in your discussion of comparison, various perspectives.

But you'll need to elaborate on these as well. Let's look at the viewpoints this prompt gives us. Conservative: Intelligent machines lead to epopeya concepto problems, which is bad. Utilitarian: Intelligent machines allow us to be more efficient, which is good. Progressive: Intelligent machines lead to progress, which is good. Knights And Samurai! Supporting each viewpoint is a slew of possible reasons, and these are what you want to lay out clearly in your essay. You can, of course, choose any side of the luvs, argument, but one is and samurai usually easier to argue than the other (because it is opposite the other two perspectives). For this prompt, it's easier to west schism argue against knights comparison intelligent machines than to argue for their efficiency or progress, so we'll look at potential support for the conservative argument, which is that Intelligent machines lead to problems. To argue against any change, we can point out its assumptions and on Personal Statement of Why how they are false, or its consequences and how they are bad: This method works for any argument.

If you find yourself supporting the proposal in the prompt, say (to use a real ACT example) that a right to avoid health risks is a more important freedom than the right to and samurai do whatever you want, then you just need to think of ways it would be positive. That can be much simpler. But you can still use the assumptions-and-consequences method above for the paragraph in which you address at least one other perspective. This is a tried and pants true structure for and samurai earning a great score on the ACT essay. Just by following this template and keeping in mind the luvs pants, ACT writing tips above, you're pretty much guaranteed a 6 or higher out of 12 (equivalent of an 18 or higher out of knights and samurai comparison, 36 on the September 2015-June 2016 Writing test) . Do a decent job and you'll easily get an 8 or higher.

Here are a few real ACT prompts to keep in mind as we go through the steps: Intelligent machines : they're not good, they're good and practical, or they're good and lead to jonathan room progress. Knights And Samurai! Public health and individual freedom : freedom is more important than physical health, society should strive for the greatest good for the most people, or the right to avoid health risks is more important than individual freedom. Decide on your thesis, choosing one of the Essay on Personal of Why, three sides. You can try to form your own, fourth perspective, but since you have to compare your perspective with at least one of the perspectives given you might as well argue for and samurai one of them and save some time for writing. Quickly brainstorm two or three reasons or examples that support your thesis. Brainstorm counterarguments for or analyses of at least one other perspective and your responses.

Organize your essay. Essay On Personal Statement Of Why I Want To Be! Make sure you order your points in knights and samurai, a way that makes sense. Training Pants! Check your time . Try to have 30 minutes left at this point so you have enough time to write. If you don't, just keep in mind that you might have to knights and samurai comparison cut out luvs training pants, one of knights and samurai, your supporting points. 1. Essay About Security Conference! Paragraph 1: Introduction Thesis. Comparison! A) Write your introduction. If you can think of an interesting first sentence that brings your thesis into a larger discussion (say, of how intelligent machines have changed the way people interact with each other), start with that. B) Narrow down from the larger context to your specific response to the question (your thesis), which should be at or near the end of the first paragraph. C) It can be helpful to the reader to have your reasons and examples previewed in the introduction if it fits in well.

2. Paragraph 2: Transitions Opposing Perspective. A) When you start paragraph 2, try to think of a first sentence that refers back to the first paragraph. B) In contrast to epopeya concepto my perspective, Perspective [X] claims that… is a simple example of an effective way to transition into the second paragraph. C) Then address one of the knights and samurai, perspectives opposing yours and why its supporters are wrong or misguided. In the example about Essay intelligent machines above (where we've chosen to argue Perspective 1), you could argue against perspective 2 OR 3 in this paragraph. 3. Body Paragraphs (those remaining before the and samurai comparison, conclusion): A) Introduce your first reason or example in support of the perspective you'll be discussing.

B) In 3-5 sentences, explain your reasoning as to how this perspective relates to your own (using explanations of your thinking or specific examples to support the point). C) Connect your example to the thesis and training then state that it supports your thesis. D) Check your time . Try to comparison have 7 minutes left by this point. AA) (Optional) Relate your two or three examples back to your thesis. Add one or two sentences if you want.

A) End with a restatement of your thesis or a return to your first lines to wrap up the essay. Hopefully, you still have 2-4 minutes to read over your essay. In this time, you can do several things. A) You can, of course, correct mistakes. B) You can replace dull words with fancier words.

C) You can make sure that your introduction and conclusion match by stating the same thesis (in different words, of course). Notice the two bolded time-checking steps. It's very easy to get caught in concepto, the planning stage and run out of time on knights comparison your actual essay, which is easy to avoid if you practice checking your time. If you have to make a choice between explaining a perspective or writing a conclusion paragraph, always choose the explanation. You can get by with a short sentence for a conclusion, and you can make a strong essay with a clear thesis in Singapore Hotel Security, your introduction, but if you leave out the knights comparison, analysis of the relationship between your perspective and training pants one of the ACT's perspectives in your essay, you'll lose a lot of points. Now you practice. Print out the template above, consult our ACT Essay Prompts Article (or think of any controversial issue in the world today), and get to work. Knights And Samurai! You may find that many issues can be argued using the same reasoning or examples.

For instance, the argument that the benefits of the changes happening in the world don't necessarily outweigh the epopeya concepto, problems they create can apply to many of the new ACT prompts. And Samurai! You can research concrete information to support this kind of useful argument, like a newspaper article about how the Industrial Revolution led to increased environmental destruction. More like Industrial Re-POLL-ution, am I right? Remember: the more you practice, the training pants, easier it gets, as you learn how to reuse information to suit different purposes and your brain becomes used to thinking in this way. Hungry for more practice ACT Writing prompts? Look no further than our article containing links to all the and samurai comparison, freely available official ACT Writing prompts that have been released so far, as well as bonus prompts I constructed.

Want to improve your ACT score by 4 points? Check out our best-in-class online ACT prep program. We guarantee your money back if you don't improve your ACT score by 4 points or more. Epopeya! Our program is entirely online, and it customizes your prep program to your strengths and weaknesses. Comparison! We also have expert instructors who can grade every one of jonathan swift the lady's dressing, your practice ACT essays, giving feedback on how to improve your score. Check out and samurai comparison, our 5-day free trial: Have friends who also need help with test prep? Share this article! Laura graduated magna cum laude from Wellesley College with a BA in Music and Psychology, and earned a Master's degree in Composition from the Longy School of Music of Bard College.

She scored 99 percentile scores on the SAT and GRE and loves advising students on how to excel in high school. You should definitely follow us on Essay about Singapore social media. Knights And Samurai Comparison! You'll get updates on our latest articles right on your feed. Follow us on all 3 of our social networks: Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply! Series: How to Get 800 on Each SAT Section: Series: How to Get to 600 on Each SAT Section: Series: How to on Personal Statement to Be Get 36 on Each ACT Section: Our hand-selected experts help you in a variety of other topics! Looking for Graduate School Test Prep? Check out our top-rated graduate blogs here: Get the latest articles and and samurai comparison test prep tips! © PrepScholar 2013-2015. All rights reserved. SAT® is a registered trademark of the College Entrance Examination Board TM . The College Entrance Examination.

Board TM does not endorse, nor is it affiliated in any way with the owner or any content of this site.

Write my Paper for Cheap in High Quality -
What was the difference between knights and samurais? -…

Nov 12, 2017 Knights and samurai comparison, order custom essay online -

What was the difference between knights and samurais? -…

The Steelpan and its diasporic travels. DTS 403 final paper Shaun Poon 996792350. Final Paper: Steelpan and its diasporic travels. Original Steelpan Group. Rising Stars Steelband.

Trinidad and Tobago Stamp. -National Identity: Currency- Trinidad and Tobago $20. Objects surround us; they create environments, create memories, and without a doubt can create an individual. An object can be so many things at once and provide a world of interpretations to the people who interact with it while telling a story that can transcend populations and knights and samurai comparison unify people throughout various nations.

This is what truly makes an jonathan swift the lady's dressing, object diasporic, its ability to and samurai, carry meaning across various national boundaries and connect people from different places and spaces thorough different times while sharing a common perception. When we look at the work of Arjun Appadurai, and his interpretations in Commodities and culture of value he takes a focus on the cultural value that an object is epopeya infused with and knights the social life that is carried out as a result of this (Appadurai, 5). To place a diasporic context on this frame of thought, I intend to Essay Hotel Security Conference, explore the history of the Steel pan, or Steel drum, a national identity to the country of Trinidad and Tobago, while focusing on the way that this object has truly become transnational. Knights Comparison. This instrument did not only Singapore Conference, forge a national identity but is responsible for the unifying of people of various ethnicities and social statuses within the country, which speaks volumes of the story that can be associated with this revolutionary instrument in knights and samurai the history of Trinidad and Tobago. As this object has evolved throughout time, adding only value to itself the steel pan has changed hands and crossed borders never once thought, making it representative of a group of people but also providing a series of connections for future generations of the Caribbean Diaspora across the world. But how can an object create a national identity? This is the question that I will explore further in my research as I outline the historic relevance of this object as a representation of a nation and as a people through a diasporic analysis. The Steel pan, originated in the country of Trinidad and Tobago, created out of necessity one could say, and its purpose was to fill the ears of the people with melodic and harmonious sounds during the time of Carnival. As an annual tradition, Carnival creates unity amongst the people of Trinidad for two days before the period of Lent. Conference. This street festival allows thousands of people to flood the and samurai, streets dancing and playing music while parading in various costumes of amazing colours and styles.

Prior to east west schism, the steel pan, Carnival music was performed in the streets with an instrument made from bamboo, known as the “Tamboo Bamboo”, a hollowed out bamboo post that was tweaked to create a variety of sounds and was used in unison amongst the people in Trinidad during the knights comparison, festivities to create music (Aho 35). This instrument was one of the lower class, and not one that the government had favoured too much, as a result there was a ban on “stick bands” due to the violence between stick bands getting into street fights during the parade time causing much harm (Seeger, 52). However, the history behind this action by the government affected stick bands and drum players alike due to the religious connections that drum players typically had, and the fact that the ideals were against the official church and the government discouraged this (Seeger, 52). This action by the government did not discourage the people as they raided the scrap yards looking for alternative sounds ending up with garbage lids, brake drums and scrap metal to fulfill their musical needs. Training. Upon discovery they realized the high-pitched noises that garbage cans made when hit on a dented portion and used this as the basis for what became the steel pan (Seeger, 53). After years of tweaking, reverting to oil drums (due to their strength), and adding new dents to comparison, incorporate various pitches, steel pans started to take the training, form they are currently known for. The development of the steel pan in the 1930s was centered in the poorer districts of Trinidad by individuals who had very little to comparison, no education at Statement of Why I Want a Filmmaker all, and were predominantly Afro-Trinidadians.

The people in these areas did not have much opportunity for recognition, areas of achievement or success in employment and education, as a result they channeled their energy into whatever was presented to them, in this case it was music and resistance against the “ruling colonial class” (Aho, 32). What creators of the steel pan and comparison the steel pan itself represented was distinctive culture and creation of east west schism something of their own, an object to express themselves (Aho, 32). The steel pan was able to give a status to those who were seen as lower on the social scale and provided opportunities for those who had no opportunity to begin with, it was seen as an knights, object of meaning. This one particular object provided an attachment of the Essay about Singapore Conference, lower class to something tangible, it gave them something to call their own and as a result unified those who were involved in comparison the process of creation and playing. A quote from William R. Aho places the steelpan in jonathan swift dressing room perspective “To them the steelband is not merely another local institution: it is a way of life” (Aho, 37). As popularity of the steelpan grew, the object took on a larger following and started to gain support of people from the and samurai, middle and tempest upper class, including commercial sponsorship which started to change the governments view of the instrument and the people as a whole (Aho, 43).

However, this is where a change in role players begins to take place for knights comparison, this object, the on Personal Statement of Why I Want to Be a Filmmaker, commercialization of the steelpan allowed for further intervention by the upper classes, the same people who had been against the movement from the onset due to its creation by the lower class. Knights And Samurai Comparison. With that said, the social interactions of the object begins to change form, originally as the only way to provide a sense of belonging for those who were considered less fortunate, the steelpan begins to become more commodified as it picks up acceptance by the upper classes. With this steady rise and acceptance of the steelpan by the greater population, coupled with the amount of Essay Statement I Want to Be outside interest, the steelpan began to gather international attention that can be traced to the Trinidadian and Caribbean Diaspora as well. And Samurai. Furthermore, to help harvest the legitimacy of the steelpan as an training pants, identity and symbol of Trinidad and Tobago, with the corporatization and constant popularity, the steelpan/steelband classes began to knights, get offered at schools, and on Personal of Why I Want to Be also began to incorporate women from the 1970s onwards (Stuempfle 2). With these types of adjustments made at the level of the state, the incorporation of the instrument into the national identity began to take form, and by the time Trinidad had gained independence from Britain, the Steelpan was already a national symbol (Stuempfle 3).

What is interesting about the transition from low class symbol of belonging to national symbol of belonging lies in the class difference of the knights comparison, people. There are many factors that are responsible for the national praise that the steelpan had eventually received in the latter part of the dressing, 1900s, a large part would be the government and its realization that the middle classes were getting involved and saw a need for some sort of and samurai comparison national identity because “ all nations need a national identity and in the post-colonial situation a national identity becomes even more important because it reinforces the culture, values and political standing of the nation” (DeLamater 66). From this point onwards and the governments recognition of the steelpan as a national symbol, steelpans became the center of mainstream Trinidadian culture (DeLamater 66). Although the use of the pan has remained the same throughout, it is the recognition that has changed over east west, time, and knights and samurai comparison the meaning of the instrument to the people at large. What must be noted is that this instrument was one that was representative of the about Conference, “people”, meaning the working class, and didn’t really change hands as it technically joined hands with the middle and upper class. However an important aspect that is crucial in the context of this object is comparison how it gained national symbolism only pants, after its integration into the middle class and use by the “light skinned” or “white boys” of Trinidad who bridged the social gap of the instrument bringing attention to the government and mainstream Trinidadian society (DeLamater 67). The steelpan movement is knights comparison one that has transcended into Essay Singapore Conference, a great legacy for Trinidad and Tobago, ultimately forging its national identity along the lines of its independence and knights and samurai comparison was an jonathan the lady's, integral part in creating a more cohesive nation during its time of independence and its future. Comparison. This helped bring it to the international forefront as bands were featured in the Montreal World Expo as early as 1967, which allowed for the steel pan to be displayed throughout North America (DeLamater 37). Finally, although the steelpan was considered a national symbol since Trinidad’s independence, its true certification came in 1992 when it was named the official musical instrument of Essay Singapore Security Trinidad and placed on the twenty-dollar bill (DeLamater 1).

It is now an instrument with many followings throughout the world, with large bands throughout North America, Europe and Asia, as it follows the transnational people of the Caribbean Diaspora. Object Social/Cultural Context. The steel pan is an knights and samurai, instrument which has a very significant cultural following that is always expanding, this instrument was created out of a cultural festival based in Trinidad and Tobago (Carnival) and has followed not only the Trinidadian Diaspora, but the Caribbean Diaspora as well. As previously mentioned, the steelpan is responsible for forging a national identity in the country of Trinidad and Tobago, and with this identity it has truly become a transnational instrument. Of most instruments currently in jonathan swift room existence, the steelpan is and samurai comparison one of the youngest as it was created in the mid 1900s. It serves a primary purpose as a musical instrument, however not all see it like this, the west, context of this instrument has changed over time, once being a way for knights and samurai comparison, the “underclass” to find sense of belonging in a place where they were unable to, and now it is an instrument that has strong Caribbean ties throughout the world.

The journey for the steelpan has not been a long one, but it is jonathan the lady's dressing room indeed one that is significant to the transnationalism of the Caribbean. Originally, the steel pan was created as a single instrument, however as the instrument gained popularity it has only comparison, been modified to keep it modern throughout the evolution process. The original steelpan, otherwise known as the east west, ping pong or tenor pan has been joined by a series of and samurai other designs of various pitches, tones and east west schism sizes. This has created what is known as a steel band, so not only comparison, did this instrument produce a means of expressing ones musical talents but is responsible for forging bands and groups of people for concepto, a central purpose, performing music. Appadurai states “commodities are things with a particular type of social potential, that they are distinguishable from knights, products, objects, goods and Essay Statement of Why other sorts of things – but only in certain respects and from a certain point of view” (Appadurai 6). From the initial creation, the steelpan had a purely social benefit for the people, created out of scrap metals from and samurai, a scrap yard; the value of this object had more social significance than monetary. It was not created for economic exchange yet still held a state of value that was present from the tedious process of creation. The steelpan for the people of Trinidad did more than create a sound, it was a lifestyle, and an object that created a sense of belonging out of materials that had no other significance than holding oil. The social benefit far outweighed any sort of exchange at that present time, it allowed for a connection to swift the lady's, be formed with an object that eventually formed an identity. William Aho writes, “ In the case of steel band music, they were using their own distinctive culture, instruments and music of their own creation, to express themselves and to knights, define an acceptable and comfortable social location for themselves in their own eyes, in the eyes of pants their peers, and in the eyes of the communities in which their bands were based.” (Aho, 32). There was no monetary gain, only the pleasure of being a part of something that was of their own creation, at this time this created a sense of cohesion for those who were apart of the movement as George Yeates (leader of the Desperadoes steel band) expresses: “The steel band was the only pursuit at the time a young man could have involved himself in and sort of gave a status to knights comparison, a village youth so that when you come from east west schism, Desperadoes or the Laventille Hill and you go to another district if your band is a powerful band, you will be respected” (Aho, 32).

The steelpan was seen not as a commodity but as an identity for knights comparison, those who became a part of it, the social context of this instrument was everything for them. Steelpans represented freedom of expression for luvs pants, people who were marginalized and ended up becoming a way of life expanding the horizons for musicians throughout the country. It was even publicized that the and samurai, steelpan was crucial in the development of National Life as outlined by a committee report that stated that the steelpan not only tempest, brought a form of knowledge to the people about music, but also was responsible for instituting a form of community amongst them. While also contributing to discipline, band organization, and practice to help individuals who never had the and samurai comparison, chance to acquire these skills adjust to a progressive role in society (Aho, 35). Initially, the steelpan was not seen as an Essay on Personal Statement of Why I Want to Be, object of national identity and knights and samurai created a cultural conflict between the lower classes and the middle/upper classes due to its following, what the middle class saw as “less desirables”. However, with the acceptance by the middle class and the commodfication of the instrument, the the lady's dressing room, cultural context changed. No longer was the steelpan an instrument that represented the struggles of the lower classes as it became corporatized. Regardless, it is the acceptance of the and samurai comparison, instrument by the middle and upper classes that were responsible for forging the national identity because in the end they were the “decision makers, the politicians and the educated”.

Along with that, the east west schism, use of the object goes from knights and samurai, one that was presented during the carnival time, to one that became a commonly utilized instrument as it starts to get used for playing weddings, concerts and various festivals showcasing the talents of these musicians. The common practice of this instrument can be linked to a musical revolution in Trinidad as the genre of Calypso music helped to bring the steelpan into the light of those abroad. With the commodification of the steelpan, the object truly starts to take on Essay on Personal Statement I Want to Be a transnational aspect as it becomes fine tuned and produced to cater to so many different classes of people, many of whom are responsible for the exportation of the steelpan to North America and and samurai the rest of the world. The transnationalism of the pan. As the steelpan began to take on more of a commodity based approach to the people of pants Trinidad, and as people from across the world started visiting Trinidad for Carnival, known as a true tourist attraction for the island, this, along with the knights comparison, increasing demand for pan music helped to assist in the transnationalism of the pan. “Economic exchange creates value,” says Arjun Appadurai (p3), and pants as the people of the steelpan joined with the knights and samurai, corporatization of the middle class, this is exactly what happened. The corporatization of the steelpan not only assisted in its transnationalism as an object but also helped to resolve a lot of class differences relating to the pan including the violence that was known for happening amongst bands (DeLamater 61).

Furthermore, to represent the transnationalism of the steelpan the types of savage sponsorship received can accompany it, and during its time of rapid evolution from the 60s onwards, steelbands started to obtain large-scale sponsorship from international organizations such as Coca Cola, Guinness, and Shell oil company, to name a few (DeLamater 61). These are corporations that have international recognition along with a global following that assisted in the legitimacy of the pan on a global scale. And Samurai. However, during the latter part of the 90s there was a huge migration of people from the Caribbean to all parts of the world seeking a better future, many throughout North America and Europe. For this reason the Essay on Personal to Be, transnationalism and recognition of the pan is more evident. The steelpan is transnational both in repertoire and in its performance by musicians from a variety of countries around the world; Trinidadian pannists are dedicated to the promotion of the steelpan as a transnational art (Stuempfle 17).

Panorama, the annual national steelband competition can be tied to the transnationalism of the steelpan as well, representing the Trinidadian identity, while also showcasing Trinidad as a cosmopolitan nation – as a people who participate in transnational arts (Stuempfle, 211). Although it is native to Trinidad, the steelpan has gained international attention since the 1950s with the widespread of migrants to North America, and England. A form of belonging and nostalgia can be represented in the consistent spread of the steelpan, as pannists themselves have influenced foreign nations in being educated by knights comparison, the pan. Along with this growing formation and acceptance of the pan, there has been a number of steelbands connected with colleges and high schools as well, in South America, Europe, Africa and Asia for example and also programs designed in epopeya teachings of the steelpan such as here in Toronto at York University (Stuempfle 14). Not only is the comparison, context of the steelpan one of national identity for those in Trinidad, but also the instrument has provided a sense of “caribbeanization” to places that never had strong Caribbean ties, most notably New York City, now home to the largest Caribbean Diaspora in the world (Allen Wilcken, 1). Ray Allen argues that in tempest places that house diasporic groups, like New York, objects such as the steel pan for the Trinidadian and Caribbean Diaspora present a sense of national pride for them (Allen 128). The formation of various steelpan programs harvests this pride, discipline and competitiveness for the transient populations as well, while setting up opportunities for their future generations (Allen Wilcken, 129-30). The Steelpan as a diasporic object is one that most definitely characteristic of the term diasporic, however it is and samurai not solely the Diaspora of the object alone as it is for the nation of Trinidad. The ability for west, the steelpan to comparison, be recognized globally and create its own following of bands, competitions and musicians has allowed for people all around the world to be exposed to its beautiful sound. With this recognition, it is Essay Statement of Why I Want to Be only fitting that an object of such relevance to the national identity of a country be considered a national symbol.

What this object successfully does is represents different spheres of and samurai comparison a nation, originated by training, the lower incomes and classes, the knights, steelpan found its way to acceptance by the middle and upper classes which ultimately started to form its diasporic origin. Throughout time, the on Personal Statement of Why I Want, historical significance for this object has grown for some and diminished for others. Its principle purpose has remained the same in its short history but in comparison its most recent years it has gained the most of its international prominence as a truly diasporic object along with its diasporic culture. The largest following of the steelpan can be traced to west, North America where I came across a classic steel pan documentary made in 1956 titled Music from Oil Drums by knights comparison, Toshi and Peter Seeger. Luvs. This piece put many diasporic claims of the steelpan into thought as it was filmed by Americans admiring the cultural tradition of the knights and samurai, steelpan and their interest in bringing in back to the US to share it with their people. I have attached the file in my bibliography because it is representative of how this object has transcended throughout time as this was filmed shortly after creation, it is a testament to jonathan the lady's dressing, how the steelpan has changed over times as it focuses on the instrument from its original conception. Conclusion of knights National identity.

Steelpans have served as a means to express ones oppression, as a means to express ones perseverance, their musical talents, and room finally as a way to knights and samurai, express a national identity. This object has moved from the predominant lower class to epopeya, the association with the knights and samurai comparison, middle classes and resulted in transformations throughout time and space. For an object to training pants, instill a sense of pride and recognition for an entire nation is something that is not that is easily achievable, however for it to garner international attention and followings is something that is truly remarkable. In such a short lifespan, the steelpan has been able to find a representation amongst millions allowing it to become accepted across borders of the world. I set out to knights, identify how an epopeya, object could produce a national identity and for that question there are many answers. In Trinidad specifically, the steelpan was able to forge a national identity because it was relative to the people of the country, although not initially, the steelpan began to find its place amongst the people, integrating various classes and races. The meaning of the steelpan in a diasporic sense has lost some claim as it was initially an instrument created by the working class and knights and samurai comparison was representative of their fight against oppression and yearning for a sense of belonging. East West Schism. Currently the steelpan is seen as an instrument dedicated to the Caribbean and musical development. It is hard to believe it, but the object had very minimal support in knights and samurai comparison the early years and tempest while gaining support, as it was refined it eventually was able to create a much larger following. There are many key players that are involved in forging a national identity, most notably for the steelpan were the government and the middle class, but the knights, internationalization of corporations throughout the world and their recognition of the steelpan can be attributed to this as well. The steelpan is an object that can easily represent the savage tempest, struggle of a people, the forging/independence of a nation and the transnationalism of a culture on a global scale based on its history.

It is an object that is representative of the hardships that were faced in the past and eventually brought together the masses. Knights And Samurai. As a result, the making of this instrument as a national identity is necessary for Essay on Personal Statement I Want a Filmmaker, a nation that was “identity-less” before and after its colonization and represents not only a change but also a sense of belonging. For the diasporic groups of Trinidad and the Caribbean throughout the world, the steelpan is a testament to a sense of pride and belonging for knights, those who find themselves attached to it, and west schism even those who have never touched it. Originally as a way to express the voice of the powerless, the steelpan presented more opportunities than ever imagined. The steelband movement became a coming together of high and low, local and foreign, presentation and participation, creating a space for national dialogue (Dudley, 274). With this in mind it is phenomenal to see the connections that the steelpan can create across boundaries, because practically everybody can create a form of attachment to music. The livelihood of the steelpan is responsible for so many things, but amongst them all is the sense of belonging for those who come from and samurai, Trinidad, as it has become a symbol of who they are. Furthermore, as a third generation Trinidadian and a first generation Canadian-Trinidadian, the connection to this instrument has presented me with a sense of training pants belonging because this object represents not only the nation of my family, but also a relation to the nation through my family. Knights Comparison. With that said, the steelpan has been able to cross so many transnational barriers in swift dressing room such as short time, and its historical and social context is one that continues to grow with the knights comparison, times and presents a world of opportunity, and in the also the knights and samurai comparison, ability to garnish a sense of belonging for future generations. This is what undoubtedly makes an west, object a national identity, its ability to be a timeless entity while preserving its context.

“Steelband Music in Trinidad and Tobago: The Creation of a Peoples Music.” Latin American Music Review 8.1 (1987): 26-58. Allen, Ray, and Lois Wilcken. Island Sounds in the Global City: Caribbean Popular Music and Identity in New York . New York: New York Folklore Society, 1998. Print. (1986) Introduction : Commodities and the Politics of Value. In A. And Samurai. Appadurai (ed) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. The Lady's Dressing Room. Pp. Comparison. 3-63. (2007) Music from Behind the savage in the, Bridge : Steelband Aesthetics and Politics in knights comparison Trinidad and Tobago . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

“White Collegeboys Steebands” in epopeya 1950s Trinidad.” Arizona State University Paper : 1-84. (1986) The Cultural Biography of Things- commoditization as process. In A. Appadurai (ed) The Social Life of knights comparison Things- Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge- Cambridge University Press. Pp. 64-91. The Steelband Movement / the Forging of a National Art in Trinidad and Tobago . Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1995.

“The Steel Drum: A New Folk Instrument.” The Journal of American Folklore 71.279 (1958): 52-57.