Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches

[Bart Lateur]

On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 08:56:16 -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:

>>     $count = () = getpwnam("tchrist");
>
>Hmmm. I agree a general purpose mechanism is good, but in this case we
>already have "scalar" so why not "list"?
>
>    $count = list getpwnam("tchrist");
>
>While I agree that /l is bad, I think going through the crap of "= () ="
>is even worse.

I was just thinking the same thing, on the proposed //t option which
would count the matches, same as:

        $count = () = /PATTERN/g;


With a keyword forcing a list context, this new option is unnecessary.
You could even build sequences:

        print scalar list /PATTERN/g;


More than one way to do things is nice, but you can overdo it. You'll
get a language where even experts don't even know half of the
possibilities. Ada or PL/1, anyone?

        <http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~frans/2CS45/intro/pl1.html>

        PL/1

        The language was intended to be a general purpose language
        suitable for all applications [...]. PL/1 also attempted to
        combine run-time efficiency with flexibility, however, the
        result was a very complex language. Consequently the language
        never lived up to its expectations.

-- 
        Bart.