in reply to Re: map() abuse or child with a chainsaw
in thread map() abuse or child with a chainsaw

If I think of future readers of my code I'll write: 
map shift(@ARGV), qw(two times);

[download]
...or (best of all)... 
shift(@ARGV); shift(@ARGV);

[download]

But this guy I wrote about, should only be allowed to use straight foreach loops from now on :=E (I'm a little emotive right now, excuse me). At least he won't be able to abuse arrayref constructor for plain old parens.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(jeffa) 3Re: map() abuse or child with a chainsaw
by jeffa (Bishop) on May 13, 2002 at 14:39 UTC
    Just for sheer TIMTOWTDI: 
    @ARGV = @ARGV[2..$#ARGV];

# or for the paran paranoid:
@ARGV = (@ARGV)[(2..$#ARGV)];

    [download]
    ... but i don't like copying the ARGV array back to itself. More readable might be: 
    my $discard1 = shift;
my $discard2 = shift;

    [download]
    Out of curiosity, why would one even want to discard the first two arguments like that anyway? Seems like a bad idea in the first place.

    Hmmmm ... sounds like time to pull out one of the Getopt modules to me. ;)

    jeffa

    L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

      Why store the results from the two shift's in variables if the intention is to discard the values? 

      shift;shift; # Should do it

      [download]

      Everything went worng, just as foreseen.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      I admire you, guys :) Correctly identifying this very needed refactoring by seeing shifting of @ARGV is long beyond my abilities :)) Yes, this utility has home-grown option processing.
[reply]
Re: Re: Re: map() abuse or child with a chainsaw
by demerphq (Chancellor) on May 13, 2002 at 15:55 UTC 
    map shift(@ARGV), qw(two times)

    [download]
    Well, no dont do that.

    :-)

    A very good hint is that you are using map in void context. Thats dumb. (no offense to obfuscators at large ;-). Map is _meant_ to return a set of values, its not meant to be used as a for loop. (In fact my personal belief is that map() and grep() are sorely sorely misnamed. They should be called apply() and filter(), but thats another flame-war iykwim)

    I would say that your second choice is preferred, or possibly 

    shift @argv for (1,2);

    [download]
    But map in void context? No thanks.

    Oh and of course, using Getopt would be a good idea too. (jeffa++)

    Yves / DeMerphq
    ---
    Writing a good benchmark isnt as easy as it might look.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Meditations