Larry Wall schreef: > Dr.Ruud: >> larry: >>> +Likewise, from the fact that list context flattens inner arrays and >>> +lists, it follows that a reduced assignment does no special >>> syntactic +dwimmery, and hence only scalar assigments are >>> supported. Therefore + >>> + [=] $x, @y, $z, 0 >>> + [+=] $x, @y, $z, 1 >>> + >>> +are equivalent to >>> + >>> + $x = @y[0] = @y[1] = @y[2] ... @y[-1] = $z = 0 >>> + $x += @y[0] += @y[1] += @y[2] ... @y[-1] += $z += 1 >> >> I assume that >> >> [=] $x, @y >> >> is equivalent to >> >> $x = @y[0] = @y[1] = @y[2] ... @y[-2] = @y[-1] [_edited_] >> >> then. > > Yes.

>> Or is a scalar required at the end? > > Yes, but @y[-1] is a perfectly fine scalar. Yes, but I meant it more at a 'source-filter' level. Suppose that you need to set everything to @y[0], I think you can code [=] $x, @y, @y[0] # looks clean, but does extra, # but maybe in an efficient order [=] $x, @y[1 .. *], @y[0] # hand-optimized? [=] $x, @y.reverse # or does .reverse copy? [=] $x, @y[reverse 0 .. *] # hi-brow? and what not. (Pardon my French.) -- Affijn, Ruud "Gewoon is een tijger."