Re: looping efficiency

You can do it like this:
A string range can be used instead of numeric values.

use strict;
use warnings;

foreach my $num_string ('0000'...'9999')
{
    my($i,$j,$k,$l) = split (//,$num_string);
    print "i=$i j=$j k=$k l=$l\n";
}
[download]

Abbreviated printout

i=0 j=0 k=0 l=0
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=1
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=2
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=3
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=4
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=5
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=6
i=0 j=0 k=0 l=7
.....
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=3
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=4
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=5
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=6
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=7
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=8
i=9 j=9 k=9 l=9
[download]

Comment on Re: looping efficiency Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: looping efficiency by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Dec 30, 2020 at 01:14 UTC
`my($i,$j,$k,$l) = split (//,$num_string);` I haven't done any Benchmark-ing (and won't), but unpack might be faster than split: `my($i,$j,$k,$l) = unpack '(a)4', $num_string;` Give a man a fish: `<%-{-{-{-<`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: looping efficiency by Marshall (Canon) on Dec 30, 2020 at 01:31 UTC
Yes, I also suspect that unpack is faster. However, I have doubts that would make a difference. Of more importance perhaps is why these individual digits need to be known in the first place? I have no idea. Maybe the OP can clue us in to what this exercise is for?	[reply]
Re^3: looping efficiency by QM (Parson) on Dec 30, 2020 at 23:00 UTC
Considering it's Perl, `split` vs `unpack` seems irrelevant. -QM -- Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of	[reply] [d/l] [select]