Re^5: Autoboxing ... "Yes We Can" ( or how I learned to love TIMTOWTDI )

> then it still used (f ...) syntax, but let the programmer specify rules to decide what to do based on any subset of the parameters.

multimethods?

> I have no problem with auto-deref.

one of the peculiar sides of Perl is that plenty of build-ins internally work on references and but force you to dereference the argument manually.

Furthermore since map and grep operate on lists and return lists it's not trivial to define other functional constructs which only operate on refs.

For instance a function keygrep {... } %hash isn't very clever, since %hash is listified, OTOH keygrep { } $href breaks the symmetry and can't be recombinded with map / grep (at least on the RHS).

Now a method could easily fill this niche by operating on _refs_ and returning _refs_ :

$href->keygrep(/.../)->map(\&func)->grep(/.../)

Maybe not easy to explain, but this caused me many headaches in the past...

Cheers Rolf

( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

Comment on Re^5: Autoboxing ... "Yes We Can" ( or how I learned to love TIMTOWTDI ) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Autoboxing ... "Yes We Can" ( or how I learned to love TIMTOWTDI ) by educated_foo (Vicar) on Dec 17, 2013 at 04:17 UTC
multimethods? Just some more terminology. A "method" is `&{lookup($x, 'name')}($x, ...)`. A "multimethod" is just `&{lookup($x, ..., 'name')}($x, ...)`). one of the peculiar sides of Perl is that plenty of build-ins internally work on references and but force you to dereference the argument manually. `each()` once only worked on hashes, so it could complain at compile-time. Now it not only works on hashes and hash-refs, but also on arrays and array-refs, so if it gets a reference, it has to either guess (i.e. DWIM) or, in the current implementation, complain and refuse to do anything useful (i.e. "Type of argument to each on reference must be unblessed hashref or arrayref").	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^7: Autoboxing ... "Yes We Can" ( or how I learned to love TIMTOWTDI ) by LanX (Saint) on Dec 17, 2013 at 07:48 UTC
> each() once* only worked on hashes,* true, never thought about it, but each can handle such problems only at runtime now. So do you like or dislike it? I mean, we could drop the new behavior in favor of method-calls on scalars... ;-) update oh just noticed again, you alread said > no problem with auto-deref. Cheers Rolf ( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)	[reply]

update