On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, John Mooney wrote:
> Actually, it is not an incorrect way I believe, so much as he is using
> slightly incorrect syntax. From the Nutshell ...
I really meant 'incorrect' in its usage, not the syntax -- he was using it
in a void context.
> ... I think the key is that he was not using a token that resulted in an
> explicit evaluation, returning & capturing a result. By wrapping the 2nd
> and 3rd tokens of the ternary clause in parens, this result can be
> acheived.
>
> Here's an example I use often in CGIs to accomplish background-color
> swapping in HTML table rows - achieiving an old computer-paper,
> green/white effect:
>
> local $swapper = -1; # globals
> local $bgcolor = '';
>
> sub swapBGcolor {
> (($swapper *= -1) > 0 ) ? ($bgcolor="#FFFFFF") : ($bgcolor="#F5DCC7");
> }
That can be dangerous, IMHO, modifying globals like that (I know it would
cause some problems in mod_perl!) I would instead code it so that the
little subroutine returns the value you need:
$bgcolor = swapBGcolor();
sub swapBGcolor {
return ($swapper *= -1) > 0 ? '#FFFFFF' : '#F5DCC7'
}
That's just more a matter of style -- I get the willies when subroutines
modify global values invisibly.
-- Brett
http://www.chapelperilous.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The English have no respect for their language, and will not teach
their children to speak it.
-- G. B. Shaw
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
