In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I often use tri-state flags, with possible value true (1), false (0), or
undetermined (undef).
The question is: how do you test for one of the flags, in particular for
0, without warnings?
Here's one way :)
use Data::Dumper;
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
grep { defined !$_ } FLAG
To extend that, if you want to test for (state(s)) use (code):
state code
undef !defined FLAG
0 grep defined !$_, scalar FLAG;
1 FLAG
undef,0 !FLAG
undef,1 grep !defined || $_, scalar FLAG;
0,1 defined
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Yanick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You provide the course, I smack the balls.
I prefer (at least sometimes) to see golf worked out interactively, on the list.
Here's a hole:
A file has 0 or more fields on each line.
Fields are separated by 1 or more whitespace
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jeff 'japhy' Pinyan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 8, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes said:
I prefer (at least sometimes) to see golf worked out interactively, on
the list.
I'm not sure I understand. Shall I show my code?
Yes.
-n $\=$/;$,=':';print/([^]*|[^\s#]+)\s
Wesley Darlington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-p s/\s*(([^]*)|((\S*?)#.*)|(\S+))\s*/$2$4$5:/g,s/:+$/\n/
That's downright clever. I think the approach could be a winner, but
as is it removes trailing empty fields:
x
becomes:
x
instead of:
x:
Wesley Darlington [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-p s/\s*(([^]*)|((\S*?)#.*)|(\S+))\s*/$2$4$5:/g,s/:+$/\n/
That's downright clever. I think the approach could be a winner, but
as is it removes trailing empty fields:
x
becomes:
x
instead of:
x:
Now that someone has braved removing the quotes in
Ronald J Kimball [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's my current solution, at 64:
-pl $_=join':',grep defined,/([^]*)(?![^\s#])|([^\s#]+)|#.*/g
Originally I had $_.0 instead of defined, but I realized that that skips
empty fields, i.e. . Is there a shorter way to test for defined?
Not that I can
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes) wrote:
Ronald J Kimball [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's my current solution, at 64:
-pl $_=join':',grep defined,/([^]*)(?![^\s#])|([^\s#]+)|#.*/g
Originally I had $_.0 instead of defined, but I realized that that skips
Bart Lateur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If it should be just fooa, then I'd like to mote that solutions based
upon this trick would be disqualified, because they won't work on all
reasonable systems. :-)
perl56delta, aka perldelta for v5.6 5.6.1, says (n.b. this line = valid perl)
File
John W. Krahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 01 February 2002 02:26, Bart Lateur wrote:
$date =~ s{(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)}{sprintf '%02d/%02d/%d', $1, $2, $3}e;
$date = sprintf '%02d/%02d/%d', $date =~ m|(\d+)/(\d+)/(\d+)|;
That's very different. Bart's doesn't translate if $date
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lines: 13
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Jerome Quelin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Vendredi 1 Mars 2002 15:42, Philip Kendall wrote :
Do we have to deal with the case of the input having leading zeros?
Sure. Excerpt from the rules:
You may assume that the first
In article p05100339b8abfb25cfdf@[192.168.254.205],
Rich Morin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Note that I'm suggesting a new function
name because printf has a little-used capability that could conflict with
my proposed syntax:
The format string is reused as often as necessary
to satisfy the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lines: 17
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Uri Guttman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i disagree. but we shall see if larry is listening to this thread and
will back away from hash interpolation or take some of our suggestions
that make it work
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There's only a clash if you double-quote the format string anyway, which
is a rare thing to need to do at all.
I'd expect that a hefty percentage of format strings have a \n.
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Dave Hoover [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Piers wrote:
So, how about having some way of letting spectators see the
entries.
I can't think of a good way to do this *during* the tournament.
I know if I was golfing, there's no way I could resist looking at
the
In article Pine.LNX.3.96.1020319100459.13630A-10@gentoo,
Stephen Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
So set up a list that all solutions go to upon submission.
No players would subscribe to such a list, and no archive
would be available
($a ^ $b) =~ /^(\0*)/ length $1
Whether they give the same value depends on the values of $a and $b. Try
it with $a = 'abcdef' and $b = 'abCdef', for example.
To work with any $a and $b, you should play it safe and say: $a^$b.
Otherwise the used-in-numeric-context gremlins will eat your
I'd just like to congratulate everyone on maintaining civility in what
could have been a very incendiary thread. (I did see one ad hominem,
but that's pretty good for 50 posts and counting.)
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Scott Wiersdorf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
$a $a-- do {
do_something();
...
}
Two questions: a) can it be shortened to fewer characters? and b) is
there another way to do it better in general?
This is longer (not to mention demented) but
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Ronald J Kimball [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if ($a=~tr/.[^0]+/0/c) { do_something(); }
Actually, it translates every character that is *not* one of '.[^0]+' into '0'.
Which means it does work, with slightly altered true/false semantics
than are usual for perl.
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Chris Dolan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
can someone explain why op=
does not warn? Is it because (quoting perlop)
$a += 2; is equivalent to $a = $a + 2; although without
duplicating any side effects that dereferencing the lvalue
might trigger
and the
Yet Another *::Util Plug:
Scalar::Util::reftype finds the underlying type even for objects.
(Unfortunately for non-refs it returns undef instead of '' as the
builtin ref does.)
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Abigail [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use warnings 'all';
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
sara starre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes) wrote:
I didn't think that was obfuscated.
How about this:
sub rotate
On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 11:34:23 + (GMT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
$i = 20;
my($x, $y, $z) = ($i++, $i, $i++);
Now, it appears that perl's evaluation order is accident rather than
design - so you SHOULD NOT rely on it. Avoid causing side-effects on
variables you use more than once...
On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 19:09:43 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 14 Dec 2002, at 21:45, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
What do you expect B::Deparse::coderef2text to do here ? Output
something equivalent to { 42 + shift } ? or produce an error (can't
deparse a closure without complete lexical
On Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:09:38 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I certainly can't see any point in conditionally giving an error based
on where the coderef2text aktescalp e.
^^^
anagram of takes place
On Sun, 9 Feb 2003 14:34:07 +1100 (EST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
sub a2 { my $y = ; $y .= $_ . \n for @lines }
The = is optional. my $x; $x.=foo intentionally doesn't warn.
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 11:09:25 +1100 (EST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
Sigh. I'd call that a bug if someone hadn't gone to the trouble to
test for it and document it. (Indeed, I see a bug report out there:
#6653, was 20010327.008.) So do something like:
my @lines
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003 23:44:14 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only if you say $x eq means no lines instead of one empty
line missing its \n :)
Well, the subject line does say textfile-like, and a 0-byte
text file has no lines, not one empty
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:30:34 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 05:15:09PM +0300, Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski wrote:
my $id = 1 if $_ == 3;
This was an accidental feature that is now kept for backwards
compatibility, because some programmers have used it to create static
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 03:48:53 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could someone please explain what is happening here?
I came across it, and had a hard time trying to figure out what was
going on.
When you use an array in scalar context (e.g. scalar(@ARGV)==foo, or even
just @ARGV==foo), it gives
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 11:02:19AM +0100, Jonathan E. Paton wrote:
Easy, the fastest method is to use stack based notation (RPN). This
completely avoids the need for those pesky brackets. The stack is
arranged into each of the permutations, and then the operators applied
in each permutation.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 10:02:34PM -, Peter Scott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Problem: multiple files containing essentially identical
reports which I want to compare. 'diff' isn't the answer;
in this case each file contains a bunch of stuff I'm not
interested in that can change; I just want
On Tue, Apr 20, 2004 at 09:59:46PM -0400, Bernie Cosell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 20 Apr 2004 at 20:48, Craig S. Cottingham wrote:
I couldn't get that to work.
Really? I cleaned it up a bit and it seems to work fine:
sub diff
{ my $diff = $_[0] ^ $_[1];
my ($len) = $diff =~
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 09:44:54AM +0200, Xavier Noria [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good. With a little modification we get 26 if this is right:
$_=$x^$y;$n=$-[0]if/[^\0]/
$x = abc; $y = abc\0\0\0; gives undef instead of the required 3
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 07:48:57AM +0200, Xavier Noria
On Wed, Apr 21, 2004 at 07:37:42AM -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Bernie Cosell wrote:
I'm not sure if this is 'fun', but it might be at least curious: I don't
have a UTF-8 system handy to try, but I'm wondering: what happens with
the string
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 03:17:56PM +0100, Jose Alves de Castro wrote:
print if ($N+1)..0;
Implicit comparison to $. only happens for constants, so that
should be ($. $N) .. 0
On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 08:08:11AM -0800, Brad Greenlee wrote:
That or someone with sufficient power could make Digest::MD5 or ::SHA1
part of the standard perl distro :-).
Digest and Digest::MD5 are in 5.8.0.
On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 04:20:05PM +0200, Vladi Belperchinov-Shabanski wrote:
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 12:33:35 +1100 (EST)
Andrew Savige [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jos_ Castro wrote:
Apart from the secret eskimo greeting and the goatse operator,
can anyone tell me about other secret
On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 03:06:41PM -0800, Zhuang Li wrote:
Hi, given an array: @a = ('E1', 'E2', ..., 'En');
Is there an easy way, hopefully one liner, to do the following without a
loop? If not, will Perl support this in Perl 6?
$hash-{E1}-{E2}-...-{En} = 1;
To read from such a series of
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 05:50:18AM +, Ton Hospel wrote:
I always found the code to do this WITH a loop quite funny in fact:
my $work = \$hash;
$work = \$$work-{$_} for @a;
$$work = 1;
Ha ha ha :)
On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:45:01AM +0200, Alexandre Jousset wrote:
Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes wrote:
To set it, you need to just do the same thing except that at each step
instead of keeping the hash element, you keep a reference to it:
$entryref = \$hash;
$entryref = \$$entryref
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 09:41:46PM -0400, Rick Delaney wrote:
On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 02:05:02AM +0200, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Jos? Castro [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-05-05 16:30]:
So suppose you want a regular expression to match at least one
of three words:
/word1|word2|word3/
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 10:39:49AM +0100, Jos? Castro wrote:
* Michael G Schwern ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
So... did I miss anything?
Should //= be in there? Because my perl 5.8.6 doesn't seem to have it...
It's in 5.9.x, or you can add it to 5.8.6 with this patch:
This may be of interest to some:
Puzzle: The Ham Cheese Sandwich cut.
http://perlmonks.org/?node_id=509409
On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 12:31:19AM -0700, Larry Rosler wrote:
From: Philippe BooK Bruhat
Sent: Saturday, June 24, 2006 04:10
To: fwp@perl.org
Subject: Re: swapping two numbers
Le vendredi 23 juin 2006 ? 17:40, Samy Kamkar ?crivait:
Although x could overflow in this case, where it
This is something people often ask for. The stock answer is that
regexes aren't the correct solution, but really it's not so hard.
This validates Gregorian MM/DD/CCYY dates, for example:
qr#^
(?: 0[1-9] | 1[012] )
/
(?:
0[1-9] | 1[0-9] | 2[0-8]
| (?! 0[2469]/ | 11/ )
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Brian Fraser frase...@gmail.com wrote:
No. Just, no.
On this list, I think that counts as high praise. Thanks!
Read this:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4077896/perl-or-python-convert-date-from-dd-mm--to--mm-dd/4078817#4078817
Err, which part?
Sorry, Randal (initially sent this only to him).
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Randal L. Schwartz
mer...@stonehenge.com wrote:
Andrew == Andrew Savige ajsav...@yahoo.com.au writes:
Andrew print Just another Perl hacker,
That's missing the trailing semicolon. I was pretty consistent on
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:48 AM, John Douglas Porter
johndpor...@yahoo.com wrote:
So is that the Perl 6 smart match operator? or something else?
The latter.
In any case... How does it work here? It looks like it's functionally
equivalent to scalar()... but why?
Perl's ~ is operand
On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Philippe Bruhat (BooK)
philippe.bru...@free.fr wrote:
Frankly, I think this could be considered a bug. Both the left-facing
and right-facing versions of the inchworm on a stick should work on
all integers in Perl. Complement two arithmetics demand it! Now, the
51 matches
Mail list logo
