Stephen Turner ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Adam Spiers wrote: > > > > Lars Henrik Mathiesen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > In conclusion: There's more than one way to skin a cat, but still only > > > a finite number. But I was a bit surprised to see that noone else was > > > using the same method as I was. > > > > I wasn't. It's *damn* clever. > > I think the biggest conceptual leap, for me anyway, is indexing a for loop > by an array, but never consulting $_,
Agreed. A very sweet idea. > just using it to do things the right > number of times without operating on the array -- and here, not even the > right number of times, just a generous upper bound. Not always that generous; in fact, it's the smallest upper bound possible without knowing in advance the size of the largest anagram set.
