# from Nelson Elhage
# on Wednesday 17 January 2007 09:29 pm:
>> check { content =~ qr{fsck.com} };
>> check: content =~ qr{fsck.com};
>> check( content =~ qr{fsck.com} );
>
> Same thoughts as the first one. I guess I kinda like the curly
> braces and =~ version; It feels like it says what it means,
> but is tight enough I won't mind typing it a hundred times (because
> for any reasonable app, you probably will be.)
I'm not sure how to pull it off, but:
qr{fsck.com} in content;
Though possibly
checks(
qr{fsck.com},
qr{foo},
qr{bar},
)->in(content);
Hmm, if content is sufficiently overloaded:
qr{fsck.com} . content;
# or
content . qr{fsck.com};
Just use the concatenation operator to run the test (of course, then you
need a special ->to_string method (and, of course warnings.)) But,
hey! We don't need to do bitwise math with that string, right?
content <<= qr{fsck.com};
I suppose you could use the comparison operators, but again, you would
have to turn off the 'useless' warnings, so as sick as it sounds,
assignment seems to be the best bet. Too bad you can't overload the =~
(or can you?)
--Eric
--
Peer's Law: The solution to the problem changes the problem.
---------------------------------------------------
http://scratchcomputing.com
---------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
jifty-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.jifty.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/jifty-devel
