On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:24:49 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 03:43:24PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > As my example shows, if the `extension' would be accepted, in whatever
> > form, I also suggest to define that each -e part gets it's own braces/
> > scope
>
> Yuck! Right now, each -e is considered a separate line, not scope:
>
> $ perl -wle'my $x=42;' -e'print $x;' -e'warn $x'
> 42
> 42 at -e line 3.
>
> I don't want to see this changed.
Then let me reword. I'd like it to be possible.
lt09:/home/merijn 104 > perl -l -e 'my $x = 42' -e 'print $x'
syntax error at -e line 2, near "print"
Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
Exit 255
lt09:/home/merijn 105 >
That's just because I left out the semicolon in the first -e
Could we then at least agree on something that each -e is guaranteed
to be closed? a lone semicolon is a no-op, so there won't be any backward
compatibility issues
> > > It would make a lot of command line scripts a lot easier to write.
> > > Also possibe would be new switches (possibly -b and -E) for putting
> > > code at the beginning or end of the script text without using a
> > > BEGIN{} or END{} block.
> >
> > /me viciously nods: very useful!
>
> Is BEGIN/END so hard to type?
No, but it is a lot to type in short one-liners
# perl -nle'BEGIN{$s="Something"}chomp;$_ eq $s and next;%s{$s=$_}++}END
{print"$_:$s{$_}" for keys%s"
doesn't really read easy
--
H.Merijn Brand Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/)
using Perl 5.6.2, 5.8.0, 5.8.5, & 5.9.2 on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00 & 11.11,
AIX 4.3 & 5.2, SuSE 9.2 & 9.3, and Cygwin. http://www.cmve.net/~merijn
Smoking perl: http://www.test-smoke.org, perl QA: http://qa.perl.org
reports to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], perl-qa@perl.org
