On Wed, Oct 17, 2001 at 07:33:42AM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> Or something else. I'm assuming something else, because there may be
> cases in which we want to define our own ternary operators. (Weird
> cases perhaps, but cases nevertheless...
>
> operator:??($)::($)
I'd expect that to be m
I am implementing a textbook algo in Perl (the textbook has
it written in C++) and have realized that if undef was to
numericize to NaN instead of 0, there are a lot of uninitialization
errors that would get caught.
use strict vars;
does not recognize use of new array indices as uniti
