On Mon, Aug 28, 2000 at 04:04:20PM -0400, John Porter wrote:
> Well, I think it's likely that the perl6 parser would be made to
> handle this; but even if not, it shouldn't be too hard to get it
> to allow a ref to such a list:
>
> for [ $x, $y, $z ] ( @list ) { ...
I'm wondering how we get both
for ($x,$y,$z) (@array) { ... }
and
for ($x,$y,$z) (@array1,@array2,@array3) { ... }
The answer seems to be to use either C<unzip()> or C<partition()>, but
we still need that syntax where we have multiple iterators. Unless
we really want to write this:
for $threes (partition(3, \@list)) {
($x, $y, $z) = @{$threes};
}
for (partition(3, \@list)) { ($x, $y, $z) = @{$_};
The square bracket syntax is alluring since it implies referenceness,
but it goes the wrong way; squares enreference rather than dereference.
Random thoughts:
for @{$x,$y,$z} (partition(3, \@list)) { ... }
for ($x,$y,$z) = @{$_} (partition(3, \@list)) { ... }
for ($x,$y,$z) (@{partition(3, \@list)}) { ... }
for @three (@{partition(3, \@list)}) { ... } # arrays only
for @three (@{partition(3, \@list)}) @indices { ... } # arrays only
Ick.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scott Duff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
