Thank you. Silly me, thinking "this is so simple I don't need to run it
through the command-line to test it." :-)
Anway, yeah,
say $_ for reverse lines
Aaron Sherman, M.:
P: 617-440-4332 Google Talk, Email and Google Plus: a...@ajs.com
Toolsmith, developer, gamer and life-long student.
It may make it clearer if I explain the broader objective. I'm trying
to learn P6 thoroughly by developing training courses to teach it from
scratch. (Fans of Gerald Weinberg may recognise the idea.) Obviously,
while doing so, I want to explore pathological cases, both to clarify
the concepts and
On 19/09/16 16:02, Aaron Sherman wrote:
> I'm guessing that what you meant was "say as a function was what I > meant to
> use there." In which case: > > say for reverse lines > > or
> > for reverse lines { say } > > These are both valid ways of asking
for each element of the iterable > thing
On 19/09/16 15:56, Aaron Sherman wrote:> You can also use map, but it's
slightly clunkier: > > "for @inputs.map: .Int -> $i { ... }"
This also needs to have "*.Int" or "{ .Int }" otherwise you'll pass
$_.Int as the argument to map rather than telling map to call .Int on
things.
I'm guessing that what you meant was "say as a function was what I meant to
use there." In which case:
say for reverse lines
or
for reverse lines { say }
These are both valid ways of asking for each element of the iterable thing
returned from lines to be printed with a newline.
But remember
"for @inputs.map( .prefix:<+> ) {...}"
That's spelled:
"for @inputs>>.Int -> $i { ... }"
You can also use map, but it's slightly clunkier:
"for @inputs.map: .Int -> $i { ... }"
Aaron Sherman, M.:
P: 617-440-4332 Google Talk, Email and Google Plus: a...@ajs.com
Toolsmith, developer, gamer
