Re^2: postfix "for" question?

well my REAL goal, if truth be told, as an APL-trained programmer, is to seek ways to produce a result in the fewest number of characters... Removing {} not only helps reach that goal, it makes things much more English-like..

TY!

Comment on Re^2: postfix "for" question?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: postfix "for" question? by hippo (Archbishop) on Sep 11, 2023 at 18:13 UTC
`perl -E 'say for (1 .. 5) x 10'` This solution is brought to you without the ~~help~~ hindrance of ChatGPT. 🦛	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: postfix "for" question? by tybalt89 (Monsignor) on Sep 11, 2023 at 19:11 UTC
How about `map CORE::say, 1..5 for 1..10` [download] `map` is almost postfix and almost like a `for`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: postfix "for" question? by Fletch (Bishop) on Sep 11, 2023 at 20:27 UTC
Not sure which circle Dante put them but I’m sure there’s a place for those misusing `map` in void context . . . The cake is a lie. The cake is a lie. The cake is a lie.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: postfix "for" question? by tybalt89 (Monsignor) on Sep 11, 2023 at 22:13 UTC
Anyone who is APL-trained is probably already used to Dante's lower circles :)	[reply]