Re^2: Checking if hash value exists without implicitly defining it

Huh. I thought you needed to use exists to avoid AVing the hash key you're reading, but that code works.

This should simplify some of my code.

Comment on Re^2: Checking if hash value exists without implicitly defining it

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Checking if hash value exists without implicitly defining it by Kenosis (Priest) on Feb 14, 2013 at 17:42 UTC
My apologies, as it should be written as: `... if ( exists $Hash{$neededVal} and exists $Hash{$neededVal}{param1} and exists $Hash{$neededVal}{param1}{key1} ) { ...` [download] Will correct the original... Update: Replaced `defined` with `exists`. Thank you, choroba.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Checking if hash value exists without implicitly defining it by choroba (Cardinal) on Feb 14, 2013 at 17:44 UTC
What is wrong with plain old exists? لսႽ† ᥲᥒ⚪⟊Ⴙᘓᖇ Ꮅᘓᖇ⎱ Ⴙᥲ𝇋ƙᘓᖇ	[reply]
Re^5: Checking if hash value exists without implicitly defining it by Kenosis (Priest) on Feb 14, 2013 at 17:52 UTC
Preferrable. Will update. Thank you.	[reply]
Re^3: Checking if hash value exists without implicitly defining it by choroba (Cardinal) on Feb 14, 2013 at 17:26 UTC
Well, it only breaks for the false values like 0 or "" or `undef`. لսႽ† ᥲᥒ⚪⟊Ⴙᘓᖇ Ꮅᘓᖇ⎱ Ⴙᥲ𝇋ƙᘓᖇ	[reply] [d/l]