On Thu, 18 Jul 2002, darren chamberlain wrote:
> This will return (some example data, too):
>
> [% mylist = [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 ];
> "'$l' " FOREACH l = mylist.first(-2) %]
> '1' '2' '3' '4' '5' '6' '7' '8'
No, that makes sense. I was getting confused and thinking. first(-2)
would be the same as last(2), which it isn't. Writing too many tests will
do that ;-)
> Why would we make it work differently from Perl?
Because it's not Perl ;-) Okay, back to work...
> list ops applied to scalars end up with the scalars being promoted to 1
> element lists,
Essentally yes.
> I'd be most inclined to not try any cleverness in the vmeths, and keep
> the implementation as close as possibly to Perl's splice behaviors. At
> least that way, it's not a surprise to everyone, just the people who
> don't already know Perl (as opposed to other ways, which everyone would
> have to relearn.)
Okay, and that makes our lives easier. Since there's another way to do
it (without any suprises) let's leave that out and DWPM (Do What Perl
Means)
> I struggled with this for a while myself, and figured that, since most
> vmeths (with the exceptions of push, pop, shift, and unshift) are
> non-destructive, it made more sense to continue with this trend.
Ah, but splice has always been a distructive inplace operation in Perl. I
don't follow your logic here - this isn't to say I disagree with the idea
though.
> And in my implementation above, I'm explicitly returning a copied array:
Yes, though this is different to the implementation you proposed earlier
in this thread where you were returning the @results.
> Since the other versions of splice are non-destructive, making this
> version an exception rubs me the wrong way. However, it also goes
> against my earlier statement of "we should do it the way Perl does it",
> because CORE::splice modifies the list.
Well, If we implement slice seperatly from splice then we could have
- slice used for getting at selections of bits of the list. i.e. it
is used in a similar way to you'd use splice when you get the
results
- splice used to get at a copy of the original list with the bits
deleted/replaced. i.e. it's like using splice in perl without
getting the results and just looking at the original list (except
in TT rather than modifying the existing list we copy a list and
then modify that one.)
Does this make sense?
> Yeah, but this is Perl; you probably shouldn't be worried about memory.
> We're creating and deleting AV's all over the place. :)
fair enough. If it was that important you should be doing it in perl
yourself I guess.
Mark.
--
s'' Mark Fowler London.pm Bath.pm
http://www.twoshortplanks.com/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
';use Term'Cap;$t=Tgetent Term'Cap{};print$t->Tputs(cl);for$w(split/ +/
){for(0..30){$|=print$t->Tgoto(cm,$_,$y)." $w";select$k,$k,$k,.03}$y+=2}
