Re: wantarray alternative

#include disclaimer on why one-liners are generally undesirable.

Consider a ternary operator. Specifically:

  condition ? result_if_true : result_if_false
[download]

You could then make this function:

  wantarray ? first {$_} map { lc } @_ : map { lc } @_ ;
[download]

Note also - return is (almost) redundant if it's the last line of the code - by default Perl returns from a sub 'the result of the last operation'. This too though, isn't always a good thing, because readable code almost always trumps really short code.

Comment on Re: wantarray alternative Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: wantarray alternative by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Jul 10, 2013 at 18:50 UTC
readable code almost always trumps really short code I know what you're saying but shorter code, like shorter sentences, tends to be more readable; short != confusing\|obfuscated. Omitting `return` is a best practice, to me, when there is no control flow and the sub is short.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: wantarray alternative by tqisjim (Beadle) on Jul 10, 2013 at 19:04 UTC
I did not intend to ask the question How do I use the tertiary operator?. Both these answers rely on the trivial lc operation I used in my example. To rephrase: What's the most elegant way to modify the default behavior of a subroutine that returns a list of one? `sub lowercase { my @out = map { lc } @_ ; return wantarray ? map { $_ } @out : first { $_ } @out ; }` [download] So my specific question is: How can I move the operation from the first line into the second line to avoid using the place holder out?	[reply] [d/l]