Re^2: new keyword "size" to avoid scalar trap ? ( scalar @array != scalar(LIST) )

> I don't see a need for it.

Honestly, did you immediately spot the problem in BUK's code?

UPDATE:

Do you really prefer explaining goatse "op" =()= and turtle "op" @{[ ]} to newbes who simply need to count the elements a function returns?

UPDATE:

> I'd rather see them overload length to accept a hash, array or reference to a hash or array.

Then it's quite impossible to tell what length ($str) is supposed to return. 1 for the list-size or the char-size of $str?

Cheers Rolf

Comment on Re^2: new keyword "size" to avoid scalar trap ? ( scalar @array != scalar(LIST) ) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: new keyword "size" to avoid scalar trap ? ( scalar @array != scalar(LIST) ) by roboticus (Chancellor) on Dec 07, 2012 at 20:11 UTC
LanX: No, I didn't notice the error. And I've never used goatse, turtle or kite. Perhaps if I had, I'd see the need for it. As far as the practicality of what length $str is supposed to return, I didn't give it much thought. I was just expressing my color preference for new new shed out back. ;^) ...roboticus When your only tool is a hammer, all problems look like your thumb.	[reply]