Austin~
On 9/29/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matt Fowles wrote:
>
> >Austin~
> >
> >On 9/29/05, Austin Hastings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Plus it's hard to talk about backwards. If you say
> >>
> >>for @l -> ?$prev, $curr, ?$next {...}
> >>
> >>what happens when you have two items in the list? I think we're best off
> >>using signature rules: optional stuff comes last.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I disagree, I think that is an easy call
> >
> >for (1, 2) -> ?$prev, $cur, ?$next {
> > say "$prev -> $cur" if $prev;
> > say $cur;
> > say "$cur -> $next" if $next;
> > say "next";
> >}
> >
> >should print
> >
> >1
> >1 -> 2
> >next
> >1 -> 2
> >2
> >next
> >
> >
> >
> Did you mean:
>
> next
> 1 -> 2 # two spaces
>
> there?
No, my logic is that the loop is run through twice, once with (undef,
1, 2) and once with (1, 2, undef).
Matt
--
"Computer Science is merely the post-Turing Decline of Formal Systems Theory."
-Stan Kelly-Bootle, The Devil's DP Dictionary
