Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-08 Thread Ask Bjoern Hansen
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000, Bart Lateur wrote: Those are not the semantics of print. It returns true (1) if successful, and false (undef) otherwise. You cannot change that. If I write print "0", it bloody well shan't be returning false. Oh, why not? Does anybody actually *ever* check the

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-08 Thread Bart Lateur
On Fri, 8 Sep 2000 01:18:19 -0700 (PDT), Ask Bjoern Hansen wrote: I really don't understand why you want to have what's printed. It is handy, sometimes. But I do think that the overhead of creating a longish string every time you print something, which is then simply discarded, is not really

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-08 Thread Chaim Frenkel
"ABH" == Ask Bjoern Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Oh, why not? Does anybody actually *ever* check the return value of print? I think it's not as if we'd break a lot of code. ABH uh, what? you don't do much socket programming now, do you? sockets ABH breaks all the time. Disks runs out of

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-08 Thread Ask Bjoern Hansen
On 8 Sep 2000, Chaim Frenkel wrote: Oh, why not? Does anybody actually *ever* check the return value of print? I think it's not as if we'd break a lot of code. ABH uh, what? you don't do much socket programming now, do you? sockets ABH breaks all the time. Disks runs out of space while

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-06 Thread Tom Christiansen
On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 18:37:11 -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote: Those are not the semantics of print. It returns true (1) if successfSNIP false (undef) otherwise. You cannot change that. If I write print "0", it bloody well shan't be returning false. Oh, why not? Does anybody actually *ever*

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-05 Thread Jon Ericson
Tom Christiansen wrote: Perl already *has* a print operator: "print". :-) I think what I really want is a tee operator. The problem with what you have there is that it hides the act of output within an arbitrarily long circumfix operator whose terminating portion is potentially very far

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-05 Thread Tom Christiansen
This is what I'd consider good style: my @output = map { $_-[0] } sort { $a-[1] cmp $b-[1] } map { [$_, expensive_func($_)] } # print original lines ; (Modified from http://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=9108) The main point of this statement is the Schwartzian

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-09-05 Thread Nathan Wiger
Jon Ericson wrote: I would want it to return @items: @sorted = sort print @items; I'd prefer a different name (tee?) and keep print as it is. Pretty much all the stuff being discussed right now can be stuck in a module: package Print::Variations; use Exporter; @EXPORT =

Re: RFC 39 (v3) Perl should have a print operator

2000-08-31 Thread Tom Christiansen
Perl supplies an operator for line input - angle brackets. This is no analogous operator for output. I propose "inverse angle brackets": "Print this line.\n"; Perl already *has* a print operator: "print". :-) The problem with what you have there is that it hides the act of output within