On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Gabor Szabo <[email protected]> wrote:
> use strict;
> use warnings;
> use v5.10;
>
> my $i = 0;
> for ($i=0; $i <= 9; $i++) {
> #say $i;
> }
> say $i; # 10
>
> my $j = 0;
> for $j (0..9) {
> # say $j;
> }
> say $j; # 0
>
> In the c-style for loop we kept the value *that failed the condition*
> but I don't think these cases are very interesting.
>
> Maybe something like this, when it is not clear up-front
> how will the loop end, is more interesting:
>
> my $k = 0;
> for $k (0..9) {
> # say $k;
> last if rand() < 0.2;
> }
> say $k; # always 0
>
> my $q = 0;
> for ($q=0; $q <= 9; $q++) {
> # say $q;
> last if rand() < 0.2;
> }
> say $q; # some random number between 0 - 9
>
> I think this is what Roman suggested.
>
I guess in that situation, the C-style for() loop would be more beneficial,
unless you have calculated values, which means it will be at least twice as
slow and you would be better off adding a variable to catch the last
desires index.
_______________________________________________
Perl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.perl.org.il/mailman/listinfo/perl
