[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: larry
Date: Sun Jun 3 17:23:15 2007
New Revision: 14415
Modified:
doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S04.pod
doc/trunk/design/syn/S06.pod
Log:
typo from Aaron Crane++
s/cat/list/ for flattening captures in order
cat() now only produces pseudo-strings even in list context
Modified: doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod
==============================================================================
--- doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod (original)
+++ doc/trunk/design/syn/S03.pod Sun Jun 3 17:23:15 2007
@@ -610,7 +610,7 @@
$string x $count
Evaluates the left argument in string context, replicates the resulting
-string value the number of time specified by the right argument and
+string value the number of times specified by the right argument and
returns the result as a single concatenated string regardless of context.
If the count is less than 1, returns the null string.
@@ -625,7 +625,7 @@
@list xx $count
Evaluates the left argument in list context, replicates the resulting
-C<Capture> value the number of time specified by the right argument and
+C<Capture> value the number of times specified by the right argument and
returns the result in a context dependent fashion. If the operator
is being evaluated in ordinary list context, the operator returns a
flattened list. In slice (C<@@>) context, the operator converts each
C<Capture>
@@ -3554,15 +3554,12 @@
...
}
-To read arrays serially rather than in parallel, use C<cat(@x;@y)>.
-This wins a "useless use of cat award" in this case since you could
+To read arrays serially rather than in parallel, use C<list(@x;@y)>.
+This wins a "useless use of list award" in this case since you could
always just write C<(@x,@y)> to mean the same thing. But sometimes
it's nice to be explicit about that:
- @foo := [[1,2,3],[4,5,6]]; say cat([;] @foo); # 1,2,3,4,5,6
-
-(The C<cat> function is not entirely useless; it also provides stringy
-semantics in string context.)
+ @foo := [[1,2,3],[4,5,6]]; say list([;] @foo); # 1,2,3,4,5,6
Let me see if I understand this correctly:
* In list context, a list of captures gets flattened.
* In slice context (a variant of list context), a list of captures
doesn't get flattened.
* In hash context (another variant of list context), a list of
captures gets flattened, and then grouped into Pairs.
* In item context, a list of captures becomes a single Array object,
and the question about whether or not it gets flattened gets deferred
until its contents get looked at in list, slice, or hash context.
Meanwhile, 'zip' produces a list of captures - which, because list
context is the default "plural" context, immediately gets flattened
most of the time. As I see it, then, the serial equivalent to
'zip(@a;@b)' would be '(@a;@b)', and 'list(@a;@b)' would be the serial
equivalent to 'list(zip(@a;@b))'.
Or does '(@a;@b)' default to slice context?
--
Jonathan "Dataweaver" Lang
