Luke Palmer wrote:
>
> > David Storrs wrote:
> > >
> > > Thinking about it, I'd rather see lvalue slices become a nicer version
> > > of C<splice()>.
> > >
> > > my @start = (0..5);
> > > my @a = @start;
> > >
> > > @a[1..3] = qw/ a b c d e /;
> > > print @a; # 0 a b c d e 4 5
> >
> > What would happen if I used 1,2,3 instead of 1..3? Would it do the
> > same thing?
>
> Of course.
>
> > I wanna know what happens if I do:
> >
> > @a[0,2,4] = qw/ a b c d e /;
>
> It would probably do the same as in Perl 5; the same thing as:
>
> @a[0,2,4] = << a b c >>;
>
> (those << >> brackets are new shorthand for qw, not that qw is going
> anywhere)
Hmm... so, if I were to do:
@x = map int(rand(6)), 1..3;
@[EMAIL PROTECTED] = "a" .. "e";
print @a.length;
Then, if the three integers in @x are consecutive, @a grows, but
otherwise it doesn't?
--
$a=24;split//,240513;s/\B/ => /for@@=qw(ac ab bc ba cb ca
);{push(@b,$a),($a-=6)^=1 for 2..$a/6x--$|;print "[EMAIL PROTECTED]
]\n";((6<=($a-=6))?$a+=$_[$a%6]-$a%6:($a=pop @b))&&redo;}
