Brent Dax wrote:
>
> Someone else showed a very ugly syntax with an anonymous
> hash, and I was out to prove there was a prettier way to do it.
Do we want prettier? Or do we want more useful?
Perl is not exactly known for its pretty syntax.
--
John Porter
>> "Brent" == Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Brent> @s = schwartzian(
> Please, if we're going to add an operator, let's not call it schwartzian!
> I have enough trouble already telling people how to spell my name. :)
Which is why my real suggestion was a 'tsort' ('tsort' eq 'tr
> this would have to be a proper module and not a builtin op. there is no
> reason to make this built in.
This was essentially my point with regards to naming this op
"map_sort_map". Just explaining the function of the op negates its
usefulness *as* an op, because of the complexity of extracting
> "RLS" == Randal L Schwartz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
RLS> sort { $a/$b expression } { transforming expression, glued with $_ } @list
RLS> so $a->[0] is guaranteed to be the original element, and the list-return
RLS> value of the second block becomes $a->[1]... $a->[$#$a].
RLS> S
> "Dan" == Dan Brian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Dan> IMO the very quest for a name would be reason enough to not do it.
Dan> "map_sort_map"? That begs the question. And since Randal asks that it not
Dan> be named after him ... (I heard he filed a trademark on Schwartzian, so
Dan> that's out.
Could someone summarize the arguments for such an operator? Doing so, to
me, seems to subtrack from the scripting domain something which belongs
there. Teaching the transform in classes is a wonderful way to both
illustrate the power of Perl's map, and more importantly, help programmers
understand
> "Brent" == Brent Dax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Brent> @s = schwartzian(
Please, if we're going to add an operator, let's not call it schwartzian!
I have enough trouble already telling people how to spell my name. :)
Maybe I should have a kid named "Ian", so I can see on a roster some
Zenon Zabinski wrote:
> Personally, I have never used the Schwartzian Transform ...
> so I may not be fully knowledgeable of its usefulness.
>
> do you need to understand the
> intricacies if you can just cut and paste and just change a few
> variables?
Not to be harsh, but you probably *do*
