> What if you give it a 1-ary sub that you thought was slurpy, and in
> fact does something different (hmm, that doesn't seem very likely).
> How do we handle options and the like?
.assuming ? Although map would be simpler, clearer and more flexible.
> Still, semantics like that are dwimmery,
On 5/6/05, Brad Bowman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> <$*IN> ==> process() ==> print;
>
> This A06 example got me thinking.
> Could non-variadic subrountines in a pipeline be useful?
>
> A single arg sub or block could be a map without the "map":
>
> <$*IN> ==> &process ==> print;
>
Hi,
<$*IN> ==> process() ==> print;
This A06 example got me thinking.
Could non-variadic subrountines in a pipeline be useful?
A single arg sub or block could be a map without the "map":
<$*IN> ==> &process ==> print;
# print map { process($_) } <$*IN>
(1..6) ==> { $_++ } ==> say;
A
