in reply to (jeffa) Re: Some missing textutils
in thread Some missing textutils

Thanks! I hadn't thought of #2 (things you didn't like). I had a foreach when I was using a hash to store data, but switched to the C-style for when I made the move to an array because, well just because that's the other idiom I'm familiar with. Although, while your suggestion is pretty safe for the chars loop isn't there a larger potential with the lines loop of instantiating a large list? As for #1, I know I know, but at least I didn't go with -s! (I was tempted but especially didn't want to force use of = to pass a value.) That and it's such a simple thing, I most certainly would have used Getopt::* if it was any more complicated; two arguments, arguments with optional values, or arguments with types. Yeah, it actually works without fully qualified $a and $b (had like that for awhile) but figured I'd go for the gusto.

Thanks again.

--
perl -p -e "s/(?:\w);([st])/'\$1/mg"

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(jeffa) 3Re: Some missing textutils
by jeffa (Bishop) on Dec 02, 2001 at 02:02 UTC
    "...isn't there a larger potential ... of instantiating a large list?"

    Pardon my being behind the times, but that is definately the case with Perl versions 5.003 and older. In my old copy of Programming Perl Second Ed., there is a footnote on page 90 that mentions burning lots of memory "under the current implementation."

    So maybe you should keep that one iterative. My mistake. :)

    jeffa 

    L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
F--F--F--F--F--F--F--F--
(the triplet paradiddle)
[reply]

In Section Cool Uses for Perl