On Fri, Jul 18, 2003 at 06:05:52PM -0400, Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> What would happen if I used 1,2,3 instead of 1..3? Would it do the same
> thing?
I would think so.
> I wanna know what happens if I do:
>
>@a[0,2,4] = qw/ a b c d e /;
Yup, you're right, I didn't consider non-cont
Benjamin Golberg writes:
> Luke Palmer wrote:
> >
> > > David Storrs wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thinking about it, I'd rather see lvalue slices become a nicer version
> > > > of C.
> > > >
> > > > my @start = (0..5);
> > > > my @a = @start;
> > > >
> > > > @a[1..3] = qw/ a b c d e /;
>
Dave Whipp wrote:
> "Luke Palmer" wrote:
> > Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> > > David Storrs wrote:
> > > > @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.
>
"Luke Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Benjamin Goldberg wrote:
> > David Storrs wrote:
> > > @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 tend to agree, I
Luke Palmer wrote:
>
> > David Storrs wrote:
> > >
> > > Thinking about it, I'd rather see lvalue slices become a nicer version
> > > of C.
> > >
> > > 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
> >
>
> David Storrs wrote:
> >
> > Thinking about it, I'd rather see lvalue slices become a nicer version
> > of C.
> >
> > 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
David Storrs wrote:
>
> Thinking about it, I'd rather see lvalue slices become a nicer version
> of C.
>
> 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
--- David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 05:52:04PM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
> >
> > --- Jonadab the Unsightly One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Am I now thinking clearly?
> > >
> > I don't think so.
> >
> > If you've created two separate arrays that happen
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 05:52:04PM -0700, Austin Hastings wrote:
>
> --- Jonadab the Unsightly One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Am I now thinking clearly?
> >
> I don't think so.
>
> If you've created two separate arrays that happen to start with related
> values, then the changes to the first
--- Jonadab the Unsightly One <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Jonadab the Unsightly One" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Does this imply, though, that it's pointing to specific elements,
>
> Wow, I wasn't paying attention to what I was thinking there.
> Obviously it points to specific elements,
"Jonadab the Unsightly One" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Does this imply, though, that it's pointing to specific elements,
Wow, I wasn't paying attention to what I was thinking there.
Obviously it points to specific elements, because the subscripts used
to create a slice don't have to be sequen
David Storrs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> my $r_slice = [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> @$r_slice = qw/ a b c d e /;
> print @a; # 0 a b c d e 4 5
This seems right to me. It would take approximately no time to get
used to this semantic, IMO.
> # Note that it does NOT modify in r
Thinking about it, I'd rather see lvalue slices become a nicer version
of C.
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
# Similarly:
@a = @start;
my $r_slice = [EMAIL PROTECTED];
@$r_slice = qw/ a b c
On 5 Jul 2003, Luke Palmer wrote:
> > return [EMAIL PROTECTED] $begin .. $end ];
>
> I fear that this might take a reference to each element in the slice,
> rather than a reference to the slice
Yes, that would indeed return a list of refs in perl5. Can it also be
assumed that the magic hy
> > On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 09:51:29AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> >
> > > Actually, you can't reference a slice! Where the heck does the
> > > reference point? I would probably do:
> >
> > Of course not. I presume it points to something non-existent just like
> > a substring reference would in
> On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 09:51:29AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
>
> > Actually, you can't reference a slice! Where the heck does the
> > reference point? I would probably do:
>
> Of course not. I presume it points to something non-existent just like
> a substring reference would in perl5 :-)
>
On Sat, Jul 05, 2003 at 09:51:29AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
> Actually, you can't reference a slice! Where the heck does the
> reference point? I would probably do:
Of course not. I presume it points to something non-existent just like
a substring reference would in perl5 :-)
$ perl -le '$a =
> On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Damian Conway wrote:
>
> > > Will it be possible (or sane even) to bind a variable to an array slice
> > It *should* be, since it's possible (if ungainly) to do it in Perl 5:
>
> Ouch, blatant abuse of perl5's aliasing with @_ and globs ;) Can I also
> assume that you can al
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003, Damian Conway wrote:
> > Will it be possible (or sane even) to bind a variable to an array slice
> It *should* be, since it's possible (if ungainly) to do it in Perl 5:
Ouch, blatant abuse of perl5's aliasing with @_ and globs ;) Can I also
assume that you can also pass around
Dan Brook wrote:
Will it be possible (or sane even) to bind a variable to an array slice
It *should* be, since it's possible (if ungainly) to do it in Perl 5:
use Data::Dumper 'Dumper';
@bar = (1,2,3);
*foo = (sub [EMAIL PROTECTED])->(@bar[1,0,3]);
print Dumper [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> Will it be possible (or sane even) to bind a variable to an array slice
> e.g
>
> ## correct syntax?
> my @array = << a list of values >>;
>
> my @array_slice := @array[ 1 .. @array.end ];
Yeah, that'll work. It has to, lest:
my [EMAIL PROTECTED] := (1, 1, map { $^a + $^b } zip(@fi
21 matches
Mail list logo
