in reply to Re^6: A more elegant way to filter a nested hash?
in thread A more elegant way to filter a nested hash?

But the op wanted to croak on different types.

IMHO all the edge cases are easier covered with a for loop over the filter and if-else chains.

Just my 0.02$

Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery

  • Comment on Re^7: A more elegant way to filter a nested hash?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: A more elegant way to filter a nested hash?
by Veltro (Hermit) on May 31, 2018 at 20:56 UTC

    I agree with you. But I don't understand why you are ignoring my point that I am trying to make. The point regards the answer that gets the highest amount of votes regards using map and grep in favor of using hash slices!

    I don't know what you mean with 'edge cases' but if you mean checking for hashes or undefined values they can easily be added with some simple if then else statements. E.g.:

        if ( !defined $n->{ $_ } && exists $f->{ $_ } ) { print "Hello a undefined value was detected\n" ; }

    2018-06-09 Athanasius restored node content

[reply]
[d/l]
      > The point regards the answer that gets the highest amount of votes regards using map and grep in favor of using hash slices!

      ha, better don't give a damn about the votes! =)

      Regarding rankings of posts compared to "quality": The correlation is so low I don't even discuss it anymore. ;-)

      Cheers Rolf
      (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
      Wikisyntax for the Monastery

      *)... well maybe except with down-votes ... :)

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom