Re: Next from inner loop only works "most of the time"

All three of of your loops use the same global variable ($_). Declare a lexical variable for at least two of them.

#UNTESTED
RESULT: foreach my $wrd(@result)
        {
            my %seen;
            $seen{$_}++ for (split //,lc $_);
            
            foreach my $ltr (keys %seen)
            {
                next RESULT if ($seen{$ltr} > $master_letter_freq{$ltr
+});
            }
        
            print "$_\n";
        }
[download]

UPDATE: Thanks to jo37 (below),I now believe that the original code 'should' work.

Bill

Comment on Re: Next from inner loop only works "most of the time" Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Next from inner loop only works "most of the time" by jo37 (Curate) on May 18, 2021 at 16:01 UTC
I don't think the multiple usage of `$_` is problematic here. According to perlsyn the global `$_` gets localized in a `foreach` loop. Indeed: `#!/usr/bin/perl use v5.16; use warnings; foreach (1, 2) { say for qw(a b); say; foreach (10, 20) { say; } say; } __DATA__ a b 1 10 20 1 a b 2 10 20 2` [download] Greetings, -jo `$gryYup$d0ylprbpriprrYpkJl2xyl~rzg??P~5lp2hyl0p$`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: Next from inner loop only works "most of the time" by tobyink (Canon) on May 18, 2021 at 19:07 UTC
I don't think it's technically problematic, but it's bad for readability and probably for maintainability. Hire me at Toby Ink Ltd or Join my OnlyFans	[reply]
Re^4: Next from inner loop only works "most of the time" by GrandFather (Saint) on May 18, 2021 at 22:01 UTC
I completely agree except I'd go slight further and suggest that anything that is bad for readability is, perforce, bad for maintainability - if you can't read it you can't maintain it (although you may be able to completely replace it). Optimising for fewest key strokes only makes sense transmitting to Pluto or beyond	[reply]
Re^3: Next from inner loop only works "most of the time" by Anonymous Monk on May 18, 2021 at 23:52 UTC
Nonetheless, `"for(each) my $var ..."` is what's recommended, and with very good reason. For one thing, inner loops (or the code which they contain) usually needs to be able to refer separately to the loop-indexes of one or more of the outer loops. This achieves that without polluting the namespace.	[reply]