* Ed Peschko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [01 Nov 2002 07:19]:
[...]
> for @a -> $a_variable1 is rw, $a_variable2 is rw;
> @b -> $b_variable is rw;
> @c -> $c_variable is rw;
> @d -> $d_variable is rw;
> @e -> $e_variable1 is rw, $e_variable2 is rw;
> {
> }
> is much, *much* clearer. IMO the current 'for' syntax suffers from
> action at a distance, even if that distance is within the same line.
> Related things aren't paired up nearly close enough to each other.
Give this man a +1. I do prefer to have associated things placed
with each other. And, as Simon pointed out, ';' is used to break
things apart, thus the syntax above makes somewhat more sense.
The best part is that I can easily comment out, delete, add part of
the expression without worrying that I'm deleting the wrong thing.
It may not be often that I will use the construct for multiple
iterators, but I can foreseeably use at least 2, and with the
added ease I can imagine using more =)
cheers,
--
Iain.
