On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Chris Davaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok, so 0 returns the empty list and -1 violates the signature? In PIR > can we have such signatures that put a constraint on the range of > values for a given parameter?
Maybe this has already been proposed and rejected, but why not simply define the limit parameter such that split($pat, $src, $limit) is equivalent, result-wise, to split($pat, $src)[0 .. $limit - 1] ? Of course, the limit-parameter case might be able to avoid some work compared to the second, which might not always be able to do its job lazily, but the return value would be the same. Then you don't have to come up with separate edge case rules for two different constructs... the one follows logically from the other. $limit is 0? @foo[0..-1] is the empty list. Check. @foo[0..-2] is also the empty list. So negative parameters don't need to Fail.. -- Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
