in reply to Re^2: Situation where warning "Found = in conditional, should be" seems obsolete (documentation - C terminology)
in thread Situation where warning "Found = in conditional, should be" seems obsolete
I agree with you.
You gave a good answer instead of me :)
>>what do you mean by "named being conditional"
I mean that when I press CTRL+F and ask for "condit..." in perlop it didn't land into 'and', 'or' sections.
By the way a warning warns about '=' been found inside "conditional", so an operator 'and' worked with "conditional". Sorry if I'm not pretty good at understanding english.
And how about replacing infamous variable names '$a' and '$b' with foo/bar or so.
UPD.: I changed my mind and now I disagree with '?:' naming 'Ternary operator' and suggest explicitly name it 'Ternary conditional operator'. Because I think that the name 'ternary' is too abstract and meaningless (it only says about how much operands it operates on). OK, it is the only ternary operator by now, but why not future Perl include other ternary operators?!
You gave a good answer instead of me :)
>>what do you mean by "named being conditional"
I mean that when I press CTRL+F and ask for "condit..." in perlop it didn't land into 'and', 'or' sections.
By the way a warning warns about '=' been found inside "conditional", so an operator 'and' worked with "conditional". Sorry if I'm not pretty good at understanding english.
And how about replacing infamous variable names '$a' and '$b' with foo/bar or so.
UPD.: I changed my mind and now I disagree with '?:' naming 'Ternary operator' and suggest explicitly name it 'Ternary conditional operator'. Because I think that the name 'ternary' is too abstract and meaningless (it only says about how much operands it operates on). OK, it is the only ternary operator by now, but why not future Perl include other ternary operators?!
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom