On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 03:49:25PM +1000, O Plameras wrote:
> Benno wrote:
> >On Fri Jun 16, 2006 at 13:51:23 +1000, O Plameras wrote:
> >
> >>Matthew Palmer wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>It increases complexity, and unnecessary code will also confuse in the
> >>>future since a programmer will look at that and think "I think that's
> >>>unnecessary, but perhaps there's something special this time that needs
> >>>it".
> >>>
> >>It's special this time here:
> >>
> >>#!/usr/bin/env ruby
> >>while not $stdin.eof do
> >> puts $stdin.readline
> >>end
> >>
> >>
> >>and here:
> >>
> >>#!/usr/bin/env ruby
> >>puts $stdin.readline while not $stdin.eof
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Ok, but isn't that very different to using the $stdin.readlines function?
>
> In the context of the two examples above,
>
> $stdin.readline yields the same results as $stdin.readlines.
No. It. Does. Not. IO#readline provides a single line, while
IO#readlines provides an array containing all of the lines in the file. The
two methods can *never* return the same value.
Reading the Fine Manual, we discover that your code probably won't work
anyway:
------------------------------------------------------------ IO#readline
ios.readline(sep_string=$/) => string
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reads a line as with +IO#gets+, but raises an +EOFError+ on end of
file.
So your example would more properly be:
begin
puts $stdin.readline while true
rescue EOFError
end
Which is an incredibly hideous way to read a file.
> So, as far as the result of my programs above I see no difference. At this
> stage, I do not know if there are any underlying differences. All I know is
> that I get the results I expected.
A very scary way to program.
- Matt
_______________________________________________
coders mailing list
coders@slug.org.au
http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/coders
