Is this correct placement of the parenthesis?
print FILEHANDLE (list_of_print_stuff);
Nikola Janceski
The straightest path is not the path of experience.
-- Nicky J. from da' Bronx
The views and
Parenthesis are optional for pre-defined subroutines, like Perl's
built-in, so most users just leave them off when they're not needed:
print FILEHANDLE list, of stuff, to print;
On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 01:28 PM, Nikola Janceski wrote:
> Is this correct placement of the parenthesis?
>
I need them.. for
print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
> -Original Message-
> From: James Edward Gray II [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 2:39 PM
> To: Nikola Janceski
> Cc: Beginners (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: Is this cor
2 2:39 PM
>> To: Nikola Janceski
>> Cc: Beginners (E-mail)
>> Subject: Re: Is this correct? print syntax
>>
>>
>> Parenthesis are optional for pre-defined subroutines, like Perl's
>> built-in, so most users just leave them off when they're not need
Hey Nikola,
My MUA believes you used Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
to write the following on Friday, October 11, 2002 at 2:28:27 PM.
NJ> Is this correct placement of the parenthesis?
NJ> print FILEHANDLE (list_of_print_stuff);
The best thing to do is look at perldoc, and try it
he fire I guess.
> -Original Message-
> From: Tim Musson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, October 11, 2002 2:46 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Is this correct? print syntax
>
>
> Hey Nikola,
>
> My MUA believes you used Internet Mail Serv
>print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
Why are you using a comma operator here and not just a semi-colon
to terminate the print statement? I.e. why not:
print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff);
next if (condition);
In both cases, the return value of print() is gett
On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 01:45 PM, Tim Musson wrote:
> use strict;
> use warnings;
> print (list_of_print_stuff); # This gives an error
I don't get any error with this, assuming I either make it a proper
declared variable or quote it, in Perl 5.6.0. It's never wrong to use
parenthesis
Hey Nikola,
My MUA believes you used Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
to write the following on Friday, October 11, 2002 at 2:40:28 PM.
NJ> I need them.. for
NJ> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
This type of thing is common in my code when I am messing aroun
On Oct 11, Nikola Janceski said:
>print(FILEHANDLE list, of, stuff, to, print), next if (condition);
>
>which I haven't tested. and do I need another comma in that?... ;) just
>fueling the fire I guess.
That is what you need.
print (FH @args), next if condition;
And no, do NOT put a comma af
On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 01:57 PM, Larry Coffin wrote:
>> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
>
> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff);
> next if (condition);
>
> In both cases, the return value of print() is getting tossed and
> the 'next if (...)' is not depend
Nikola Janceski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this correct placement of the parenthesis?
>
> print FILEHANDLE (list_of_print_stuff);
>
Not really. It will usually work, but the FILEHANDLE
is the first argument, so it ought to be:
print(FH "foo", "bar");
--
Steve
perldoc -qa.j | perl -
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 02:57:21PM -0400, Larry Coffin wrote:
> >print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
>
> Why are you using a comma operator here and not just a semi-colon
> to terminate the print statement? I.e. why not:
>
> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff);
> next
At 3:05 PM -0400 10/11/02, James Edward Gray II wrote:
>>> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
>>
>> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff);
>> next if (condition);
>But these two examples don't behave the same. The first one prints
>and calls next, only on the condition. T
Nikola Janceski wrote:
> I need them.. for
>
>
> print FILEHANDLE (list, of, stuff), next if (condition);
>
you probably just want:
print FILEHANDLE qw(list of stuff) and next if(condition);
david
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECT
On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 01:50:53PM -0500, James Edward Gray II wrote:
> It's the indirect method call syntax, as far as I understand.
It looks like it, but it isn't. See
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg33969.html for a recent
discussion on that.
> Personally though, I wouldprefer to see your example
On Friday, October 11, 2002, at 05:01 PM, Michael Fowler wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 01:50:53PM -0500, James Edward Gray II wrote:
>> It's the indirect method call syntax, as far as I understand.
>
> It looks like it, but it isn't. See
> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg33969.html for a
> recent
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff 'Japhy' Pinyan) writes:
>
>>> if (condition) {
>>> print FILEHANDLE list, of, stuff;
>>> next;
>>> }
>>
>I rarely do that. Unless the body of the block is going to be enormous, I
>do it without the block. However, I think print(FOO
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Fowler) writes:
>On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 01:50:53PM -0500, James Edward Gray II wrote:
>> It's the indirect method call syntax, as far as I understand.
>
>It looks like it, but it isn't. See
>http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg33969.html for a re
On Oct 11, Michael Fowler said:
>> if (condition) {
>> print FILEHANDLE list, of, stuff;
>> next;
>> }
>
>I agree. It's much more readable.
I rarely do that. Unless the body of the block is going to be enormous, I
do it without the block. However, I think print(FOO @list) looks real
20 matches
Mail list logo
