Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think I've missed something, even after poring over the archives for
some hours looking for the answer. How does one write defaulting
subroutines a la builtins like print() and chomp()? Assume the code:
for {
printRec;
}
printRec
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 04:26, Piers Cawley wrote:
Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think I've missed something, even after poring over the archives for
some hours looking for the answer. How does one write defaulting
subroutines a la builtins like print() and chomp()? Assume the
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 09:40:16AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 04:26, Piers Cawley wrote:
Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think I've missed something, even after poring over the archives for
some hours looking for the answer. How does one write
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 00:37, Melvin Smith wrote:
At 04:03 PM 4/11/2002 -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
Notice that we have two different types of defaulting here. The second
argument is the file to work on, and we set it to a reasonable default
if it is undefined for whatever reason. However,
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 09:26:45AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
Trey Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think I've missed something, even after poring over the archives for
some hours looking for the answer. How does one write defaulting
subroutines a la builtins like print() and chomp()?
On Fri, 2002-04-12 at 09:52, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 09:40:16AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote:
sub printRec() { printRec($_) } # No args, therefore no new topic.
sub printRec($rec) { .chomp; print :$rec:\n } # 1 arg
I think was he was saying is
- Original Message -
From: Graham Barr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hm, I wonder if
sub printRec($rec=$_) { ... }
or someother way to specify that the current topic be used
as a default argument, might be possible
Would it would be reasonable to have given default to the caller's topic?
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Ashley Winters writes:
Would it would be reasonable to have given default to the caller's topic?
sub printRec {
given {
# $_ is now the caller's topic in this scope
}
}
Perhaps Cgiven caller.topic {} would work as well.
Yes, something
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Trey Harris wrote:
I think I've missed something, even after poring over the archives for
some hours looking for the answer. How does one write defaulting
subroutines a la builtins like print() and chomp()? Assume the code:
for {
printRec;
}
printRec
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
Couldn't you do it with old-style Perl5 subs?
sub printRec {
my $p = chomp(shift // $_);
print :$_:\n
}
Or am _I_ missing something?
That definitely won't work (aside from the $p/$_ swap which I assume is
unintentional),
Oops, caught my own mistake...
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Trey Harris writes:
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Luke Palmer writes:
sub printRec {
my $p = chomp(shift // $_);
print :$_:\n
}
[Should be equivalent to]
sub printRec {
my $p = chomp(shift //
On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 08:49:40AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
Aaron Sherman writes:
: On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 00:42, Luke Palmer wrote:
: $foo.instancevar = 7;
:
: This should not be allowed.
Well, that depends on what you mean by this. :-)
That is, in fact, calling an accessor
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Glenn Linderman writes:
$_ becomes lexical
$_ gets aliased to the first topic of a given clause (hence changes
value more often, but the lexical scoping helps reduce that impact)
Okay. But it sounds like you're saying that Cgiven, and Cgiven only,
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 02:44:38AM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
I think I've missed something, even after poring over the archives for
some hours looking for the answer. How does one write defaulting
subroutines a la builtins like print() and chomp()? Assume the code:
for {
printRec;
Okay, first thing to keep in mind, this hasn't been finally-finalized
yet. Alot was hashed out in the process of proofing E4, but there will
be more to come.
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 07:39:17PM -0400, Trey Harris wrote:
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Glenn Linderman writes:
$_ becomes
Allison Randal wrote:
In a message dated Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Glenn Linderman writes:
$_ becomes lexical
Sound logic. And it almost did go that way. But subs that access the
current $_ directly are far too common, and far to useful.
One thing I'm missing is how those common useful subs that
Dave Mitchell wrote:
The top 20 'my $var' declarations in .pm files in the bleedperl
distribution:
How *dare* you introduce hard data into this discussion!
Next you'll be wanting to deal in actual facts rather than personal
opinion and sheer guesses!!
;-)
Thanks, Dave. Very illuminating.
SUMMARY
A way to declare public names for params irrelevant to the internal variable
names:
sub load_data (-filename $filename_tainted ; 'version' 'ver'
$version_input / /= 1) {...}
DETAILS
Subroutine variables are like underwear: you don't generally go showing them
to everybody. So, when
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:00:37PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
X-posting to perl6-language
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As for cleanness, this is my interpretation of how perl6 is going
to work:
%foo = ();
if %foo {key} {print Hello 1}
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:00:37PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
X-posting to perl6-language
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As for cleanness, this is my interpretation of how perl6 is going
to work:
%foo = ();
if %foo {key} {print Hello 1}
%foo = ();
if
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:42:07PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why isn't
if %foo {key} {print Hello 1}
equivalent with the perl5 syntax:
if (%foo) {key} {print Hello 1}
Which keyword is it expecting?
Keyword /els(e|if)/, or end of line, or
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:42:07PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why isn't
if %foo {key} {print Hello 1}
equivalent with the perl5 syntax:
if (%foo) {key} {print Hello 1}
Which keyword is it expecting?
Keyword /els(e|if)/, or end of line, or
--
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002 18:27:11
abigail wrote:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:42:07PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why isn't
if %foo {key} {print Hello 1}
equivalent with the perl5 syntax:
if (%foo) {key} {print Hello 1}
Which keyword is it
On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Miko O'Sullivan wrote:
SUMMARY
A way to declare public names for params irrelevant to the internal variable
names:
sub load_data (-filename $filename_tainted ; 'version' 'ver'
$version_input / /= 1) {...}
I like it. It's clean (doesn't introduce any wierd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Apr 12, 2002 at 04:42:07PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Why isn't
if %foo {key} {print Hello 1}
equivalent with the perl5 syntax:
if (%foo) {key} {print Hello 1}
Which keyword is it expecting?
Keyword
25 matches
Mail list logo
