> On 30/06/2023 06:06, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
>> if @*ARGS.elems > 0 && "@*ARGS[0]".lc eq "debug" {...}
On 6/30/23 02:40, Richard Hainsworth wrote:
I tried this and it worked without any problem.
And today is is working for me as well without
a problem. I must have had somethin
;> that you can safely use them after a list operator without the need
>> for
>> parentheses:
>>
>> unlink "alpha", "beta", "gamma"
>> or gripe(), next LINE;
>>
>> With the C-style
out the need for
> parentheses:
>
> unlink "alpha", "beta", "gamma"
> or gripe(), next LINE;
>
> With the C-style operators that would have been written like this:
>
> unlink("alpha", "beta", "ga
s(unlink("alpha", "beta", "gamma")) {
gripe();
next LINE;
}
Using "or" for assignment is unlikely to do what you want; see below.
From: yary
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2023 8:45 AM
To: Richard
And then nobody mentions that `and` has low priority. Try `say 42 & 13` and
`say 42 and 13`.
Best regards,
Vadim Belman
> On Jun 30, 2023, at 9:45 AM, yary wrote:
>
> Most of Richard's parting suggestions I understand & agree with, but not
> this: " why are you using '&&' and not 'and' "
>
Most of Richard's parting suggestions I understand & agree with, but not
this: " why are you using '&&' and not 'and' "
My habit (from Perl 5 days) is to use && || for expressions, and reserve
"and" "or" for "do this if assignment/function call without parens
succeeds/fails" – is there a refinemen
I tried this and it worked without any problem.
Here's the whole program:
use v6.d;
say @*ARGS.raku;
if @*ARGS.elems > 0 && "@*ARGS[0]".lc eq "debug" {
say 'got' }
and at the terminal:
$ raku todd-test.raku debug --debug=50
["debug", "--debug=50"]
got
FWIW
why are you quoting ARGS? The .l
Hi All,
This gets the finger wagged at me for a "Nil"
when @*ARGS.elems equals zero:
if @*ARGS.elems > 0 && "@*ARGS[0]".lc eq "debug" {...}
I have to do this instead:
if @*ARGS.elems > 0 {
if "@*ARGS[0]".lc eq "debug" {...}
}
Do I misunderstand something? In an AND, is
not the test
