Re: [Boston.pm] Hash of hashes question

2003-02-06 Thread Evan A. Zacks
On Thu, Feb 06, 2003 at 10:56:06AM -0500, Joel Gwynn wrote: Wow. This is driving me crazy. I'm looking for a value in one of the keys in a hash, like so: [...] Now, what's driving me crazy is that the two test values are being added to the hash, simply by looking for $apples{$t}{weight}.

Re: [Boston.pm] Hash of hashes question

2003-02-06 Thread Uri Guttman
ARJB == Anthony R J Ball [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ARJB It is called auto-vivification, and you can't avoid it. ARJB If you look at a hash of a hash that doesn't exist, perl ARJB creates the lower hash, rather than giving you an error ARJB for trying to access a hash that does not

Re: [Boston.pm] Hash of hashes question

2003-02-06 Thread Uri Guttman
DB == Dan Boger [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: DB aren't you auto-vivifying the hash keys, are you're looking them up? by DB checking the value of $apples{crabapple}{weight} you are automatically DB creating those keys. perhaps 'exists' would avoid that? or you could DB check the existance

Re: [Boston.pm] Hash of hashes question

2003-02-06 Thread GregLondon
Uri, Perhaps you could supply some code that would clarify your position. Here's my complete script: #!/usr/local/bin/perl -s use strict; use warnings; use Data::Dumper; my %apples = ( macintosh = {weight = '10lb', cost = '5'}, red_delicious = {weight = '15lb', cost = '2'},

Re: [Boston.pm] Hash of hashes question

2003-02-06 Thread GregLondon
Joel Gwynn wrote: Thanks all for the explanation, and to Uri for the article, but especially to Greg, who has given perhaps the most cryptic and disturbing intro to a technical explanation ever: you've glimpsed the dark side of autovivification. way back when, back before perl was even a

[Boston.pm] That's a Haiku. A freaky little perl Haiku.

2003-02-06 Thread GregLondon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do What I Mean and Autovivification aren't what I wanted. Hm, though technically accurate in Joel's situation, I think it would be better if I generalize it to be more universal, rather than worry about it being taken out of context. Therefore: Do What I Mean and

RE: [Boston.pm] That's a Haiku. A freaky little perl Haiku.

2003-02-06 Thread Tolkin, Steve
Actually the best poetic form to feature the word autovivication would seem to be the Double Dactyl see http://lonestar.texas.net/~robison/dactyls.html http://www.kith.org/logos/words/lower/d.html etc. e.g. the self-describing Higgledy-Piggledy Dactyls in dimeter, Verse form with choriambs

[Boston.pm] the word is autovivification

2003-02-06 Thread Uri Guttman
i got burned on this too. there is another syllable some of you are missing. the word root is vivify. so don't drop the 'fy' part. just prefix auto- and convert the 'y' to 'ication' autovivification :) uri -- Uri Guttman -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [Boston.pm] the word is autovivification

2003-02-06 Thread Chris Devers
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003, Uri Guttman wrote: i got burned on this too. there is another syllable some of you are missing. the word root is vivify. so don't drop the 'fy' part. just prefix auto- and convert the 'y' to 'ication' autovivification :) To be fair though, I think this was a

Re: [Boston.pm] the word is autovivification

2003-02-06 Thread GregLondon
hm. My original haiku was correct. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do What I Mean and Autovivification aren't what I wanted. believe me, I counted syllables about twenty times just to make sure it had 7. Thank god there weren't more than seven, cause I'm not sure legal haiku syntax allows

Re: [Boston.pm] the word is autovivification

2003-02-06 Thread Chris Devers
On Thu, 6 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Do What I Mean and - Autovivification - can be unwanted Do What I Mena and Autovivication can also be misspelled. :) -- Chris Devers[EMAIL PROTECTED] thread, n. 1 A poor but honest process trying to survive in a hostile environment. 2