Re: Argument isn't numeric in sort -- resolve or ignore?

it seems to be tied to the two lines I commented on

"It seems"? So the problem is that you don't understand what your program actually does. That's okay. There is smartmatch there... I don't understand smartmatch either. Let's face the terrible truth - smartmatch is just too smart for us.

So don't use smartmatch.

Comment on Re: Argument isn't numeric in sort -- resolve or ignore?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Argument isn't numeric in sort -- resolve or ignore? by stevieb (Canon) on Feb 26, 2016 at 00:34 UTC
The smartmatch operator, `~~`, is to the most recent version of `bleadperl` (5.23.8) considered experimental (and has been for a very long time). I haven't read up on any tickets recently on it, but it most certainly shouldn't be relied upon. This smartmatch operator was introduced in `5.10.0`, and if one reads through docs, wasn't ever really 'liked'. The introduction was in perldelta 5.10.0. As with any `experimental` feature, one should refrain from using it in any production code, and refer to the most recent `perldelta` to see what will live and/or die. Data::Compare may help here.	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Argument isn't numeric in sort -- resolve or ignore?
by stevieb (Canon) on Feb 26, 2016 at 00:34 UTC

The smartmatch operator, ~~, is to the most recent version of bleadperl (5.23.8) considered experimental (and has been for a very long time).

I haven't read up on any tickets recently on it, but it most certainly shouldn't be relied upon.

This smartmatch operator was introduced in 5.10.0, and if one reads through docs, wasn't ever really 'liked'. The introduction was in perldelta 5.10.0.

As with any experimental feature, one should refrain from using it in any production code, and refer to the most recent perldelta to see what will live and/or die.

Data::Compare may help here.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]