in reply to Re^3: A more concise way to map the contents of an array.
in thread A more concise way to map the contents of an array.

So just to be clear, if i double negate something, i'll lose the original "value" and be left with the pure boolean representation of the data? That could prove useful!

Thanks again for your reply!

  • Comment on Re^4: A more concise way to map the contents of an array.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: A more concise way to map the contents of an array.
by Athanasius (Archbishop) on Dec 30, 2012 at 14:42 UTC
[reply]

      Thanks for the welcome and the info!

[reply]
Re^5: A more concise way to map the contents of an array.
by LanX (Saint) on Dec 30, 2012 at 14:03 UTC
    Yes ... negating means evaluating in boolean context!

    (well "pure"¹ is a risky adjective in the sphere of Perl's DWIM flexibility ... ;)

    Anyway if this approach ever fails it certainly is a bug!

    EDIT:

    IMHO people prefer using 0 for false because it's easier to print and read than an empty string. But technically this is not necessary.

    Cheers Rolf

    ¹) lets say "well-defined"!

[reply]

      Ok, thanks again for your help!

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom