Re: RFC 110 (v3) counting matches

[email protected] (Jonathan Scott Duff)
Newsgroups perl.perl6.language.regex
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 08:56:16AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote:
> Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >
> >     $count = getpwnam("tchrist")/l;
> >     $count = getpwnam("tchrist", LIST);
> >     $count = getpwnam("tchrist")->as_list;
> > 
> > All of those, frankly, suck.  This is much better:
> > 
> >     $count = () = getpwnam("tchrist");
> 
> Hmmm. I agree a general purpose mechanism is good, but in this case we
> already have "scalar" so why not "list"?
> 
>     $count = list getpwnam("tchrist");
> 
> While I agree that /l is bad, I think going through the crap of "= () ="
> is even worse. Does it work? Yes. But is it easily usable and fun, even
> for non-experts? No.

I'll agree that /l is bad too.  But I think adding a new "list"
keyword is also bad.  What about other contexts?  Are we going to have
"scalar", "list", "hash", "boolean", "string", "number", etc.?  Not to
mention (even though I am) user-defined contexts (my Dog $spot; $spot
= gen_dog();  <-- that's a "Dog" context).

-Scott
-- 
Jonathan Scott Duff
[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.