At 01:55 PM 4/29/02 -0500, Allison Randal wrote: >On Mon, Apr 29, 2002 at 10:10:01AM -0400, Aaron Sherman wrote: > > Again, it's just first derivative over time. You're not asking "is there > > a false value", you're asking "is the loop false". Just as we understand > > that an array in a conditional context is false if it is empty, so too > > is a loop false if it is "empty". This is a basic Perl concept, and it > > makes sense to promote it from static arrays to more dynamic loops. > >I agree again. > >There will have to be a section of the training material devoted to >"When is a loop false?" (I like that perspective, it nicely unifies the >cases), but it should be a short one.
I would have said that the value of a loop was the value of the last expression evaluated in it (and undef or empty list for loops that didn't execute at all). Which means that some loops could execute and still be false. Is this hopelessly retrograde thinking? Are the hordes of programmers yet-to-be that will be weaned exclusively on Perl 6 look scornfully on me for such opinions and say, "There goes another Perl 5 programmer, pass the Geritol"? -- Peter Scott Pacific Systems Design Technologies
