On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 10:39:42AM -0500, John Porter wrote: > Uri Guttman wrote: > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Why does it work that way? > > > > people wanted access the the actual values of a hash when doing > > foreach ( values %hash ) > > so they can mung them. > > Yes; but the question isn't really "why", it's "how". > Apparently chop() is specialized internally to detect the > hashness of its argument, in a way that can't be expressed > by a prototype. And I guess every other operator is specialized internally as well? $ perl -wle '%h = qw /foo bar baz qux/; map {s/.$//} %h; $, = " "; print %h' foo ba baz qu $ Abigail
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! abigail
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! abigail
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Uri Guttman
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Casey R. Tweten
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! John Porter
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! abigail
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Michael G Schwern
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Uri Guttman
- Re: RFC195: Do not remove 'chop' PLEASE! Bart Lateur