I'd agree that this is an inefficient way of doing this, but the
link you're giving is not a good example to send people to. The code given
will not create the kind of situation described, even if it does create less
readable code. Perhaps a better idea would be to give an example of the
same snippet using a hash or array of arrays?
Side note to the author of the article: It's a bad idea in general to
describe anything you disagree with as 'stupid' if your intent is to
actually convey your point of view to someone else. It's argumentative,
undescriptive, and unnecessary.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Showalter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 2:02 PM
To: 'Timothy Johnson'; 'Morrigan'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Can you have a function automatically make a set of
numbered arrays?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Timothy Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 4:28 PM
> To: 'Morrigan'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Can you have a function automatically make a set of
> numbered arrays?
>
> ...
> ${'array'.$arraycount}[1] = $line_items[42];
Ooh, don't do this kind of thing.
See http://perl.plover.com/varvarname.html
A "set of numbered whatevers" is an array. So a "set of numbered arrays"
should be constructed as an array of arrays:
$arr[$count][1] = 'whatever';
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email may contain confidential and privileged
material for the sole use of the intended recipient.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
the sender and delete all copies.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
