In a message dated Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Aaron Sherman writes:
But would it be reasonable to also provide a named-only parameter to
each for that purpose?
our List multi Container::each(Bool :$stop, Container [EMAIL PROTECTED])
So that:
for each(:stop, =<>; 1..*) -> ($line, $lineno) {
say "$lineno: $line";
}
would only iterate until one of the containers was exhausted (in this
case, the filehandle).
Should this be added? Should zip have the same modifier?
It sounds reasonable to me, but :stop reads badly. Maybe C<:strictly>?
Maybe it's not a function of a flag to each, but a marking that certain
lists should be tapped non-exhaustively:
for each(=<>; :with(1..*)) -> ($line, $lineno)
Where "with" is almost certainly the wrong word. That way, you could
write:
for each(@queue1; @queue2; :with(1..*)) -> $t1, $t2, $job_num {
say "Running job #$job_num";
$proc1.run_task($t1); # Can deal with $t1 being undef
$proc2.run_task($t2); # Ditto with $t2
}
And you'll eat the rest of @queue1 or @queue2's elements even if they
don't match up exactly.
This all makes me wonder if there's any problem with mixing and matching
these loop modifying subs:
for each(roundrobin(@queue1; @queue2); :with(1..*)) -> $task, $job_num {
say "Running task {$task.id}(#$job_no)";
$task.run(:$job_num);
}
I hope not.
Trey
