> Here are some of the answers from my own notes. These behaviors have
> all been confirmed on-list by the design team:
>
> An @array in list context returns a list of its elements
> An @array in scalar context returns a reference to itself (NOTE1)
> An @array in numeric (scalar) context retur
--
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 17:14:17
Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
>
>--
>
>On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 18:29:29
> Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
>>As near as I can tell, the only problem with the nice flow of:
>>
>> A I is a piece of data.
>> A I is a variable that holds a literal.
>>
>> A I is a sequence of lit
--
On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 18:29:29
Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
>As near as I can tell, the only problem with the nice flow of:
>
> A I is a piece of data.
> A I is a variable that holds a literal.
>
> A I is a sequence of literals and scalars.
> An I is a variable that holds a list.
>
>is the "Rvalue-
As near as I can tell, the only problem with the nice flow of:
A I is a piece of data.
A I is a variable that holds a literal.
A I is a sequence of literals and scalars.
An I is a variable that holds a list.
is the "Rvalue-assign list", which takes the form of:
($r1, $r2, $r3) = (1, 2, 3);
Wel
--
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 12:28:23
Luke Palmer wrote:
>> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 10:34:57 -0800
>> From: Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> On Monday, February 10, 2003, at 05:56 PM, Luke Palmer wrote:
>> > Indeed, this supports the distinction, which I will reiterate:
>> >
>> > - Ar
On Tuesday, February 11, 2003, at 04:56 PM, Deborah Ariel Pickett
wrote:
But is it OK for a list to be silently promoted to an array when used
as an array? So that all of the following would work, and not just
50%
of them?
(1..10).map {...}
[1..10].map {...}
And somehow related to al
On 2003-02-12 at 11:07:45, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Meaning that "I think this should be possible, but I'm not
> sure if that syntax is correct, because it would mean that
> the arrayrefs would need to be their own class to allow
> a method to be called on it.
No, they wouldn't, unless I'm missing s
Mark J. Reed wrote:
On 2003-02-11 at 17:12:52, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
(@a,@b,@c).pop
This doesn't make any sense, since pop modifies the pop-ee.
What do you expect should happen here?
[@a,@b,@c].pop
Same as above.
Except that the Perl5 equivalent, ugly as the syntax
On 2003-02-11 at 16:52:36, Dave Whipp wrote:
> "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > On 2003-02-11 at 17:44:08, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> > > pop @{[@a,@b,@c]}
> > >
> > > It creates an anonymous array, then removes the last
On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 09:17:22AM +0100, Stéphane Payrard wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 11:42:27PM -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> > Stéphane Payrard:
> > # I was so sure that, in case of success, the file operators
> > # would return the filename that I wrote the following code to
> > # print wher
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 11:42:27PM -0800, Brent Dax wrote:
> Stéphane Payrard:
> # I was so sure that, in case of success, the file operators
> # would return the filename that I wrote the following code to
> # print where are the perl interpretors in the PATH. But, in
> # case of success, fileo
> Phil, please see the perlfunc entry for "pos" and the perlre section
> on \G. This is what you need.
Thanks a lot! I know about pos but thought it was read-only.
And \G is relatively new, isn't it? Certainly wasn't
existing in '97 when I learned perl :-)
And the "basics" are seldom read again
12 matches
Mail list logo
