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 "Done!";
>
> sub printRec {
> chomp;
> print ":$_:\n";
> }
You could take advantage of subroutine signatures and multi-dispatch
sub printRec() { printRec($_) } # No args, therefore no new topic.
sub printRec($rec) { .chomp; print ":$rec:\n" } # 1 arg
Assuming we *get* multidispatch that is. It would be nice to hope that
the compiler could optimize that...
--
Piers
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
-- Jane Austen?
