Larry Wall writes: > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 05:30:23PM +0300, Gaal Yahas wrote: > > : We have a very nifty reduce metaoperator. Scans are a counterpart of > : reduce that are very useful -- they are the (preferably lazy) list > : of consecutive accumulated reductions up to the final result.
I'm obviously insufficiently imaginative. Please can you give a few examples of these things being very useful? > Maybe that's just what reduce operators do in list context. Instinctively I'm resistant to that, cos I can think of situations where I'd invoke reduce operators (or where I already do the Perl 5 equivalent) wanting a reduction and where the code just happens to be in list context: in a C<say> call, or in the block of a C<map>. Having to remember to use C<~> or C<+> to avoid inadvertently getting something complicated I don't understand sounds like the kind of thing that would trip me up. But this could just be because I don't (yet) grok scans. Smylers
