Peter G Martin writes: > Rather, I'd just change the comment a bit. -- And suggest this kind > of wording is used more extensively (but NOT universally) ... why > not
I know it takes a while to understand shift's relationship to @_. But we have to stay focused. The FAQ entry in question deals with shuffling. We should assume that the reader simply wants to know how to shuffle. If they want to find out what 'shift' does, they can look that up--it's a separate issue. If we assume that every program has to explain everything, we're going to drown the reader in useless information. The line has to be drawn somewhere. By executive decision, it's being drawn here :-) Nat
