in reply to using two arrays to make a table

Your inner loop confuses me. For one, you're using the conditional == operator when you probably mean the assignment = operator. Secondly, why are you using a C-style for loop on the inside when you can just say 

foreach my $heading(@headings) { 
    print $heading;
    foreach my $name (@names) { 
        print $name;
    }
}

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: using two arrays to make a table
by demerphq (Chancellor) on Jun 18, 2002 at 18:32 UTC
    Secondly, why are you using a C-style for loop on the inside when you can just say

    I imagine because he has 1 list of names, and he wants 10 at a time. Your code doesnt do that at all. (Sorry ;-)

    But i agree with you that the 3 arg for is a bad call, especially considering his mistake with the initializer. Personally i would do this: 

    foreach $heading (@headings)
{
 print $heading;
 print "".shift(@names) for 1..10; # the "". might not be needed, cant
+ remember :-)
}

    [download]
    But its a little hard to say considering we dont know the constraints. For instance are there for sure a sufficient number of names?

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

[reply]
[d/l]
      Well, I don't know what's so bad about a "C-style for loop" (it isn't there so people can complain about its usage), but if you're going to be picky, don't replace it with another wimpy for loop. Just use some power: 
          print $_, splice @names => 0, 10 for @headings;

      [download]

      Abigail

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
        I don't know what's so bad about a "C-style for loop"

        There are two problems with C style for loops. First they are prone to fencepost errors. In fact programmers that dont have a C/Java background get them wrong an awful lot, for instance I come from a Pascal background, and despite being a reasonably good programmer often make mistakes when I use them. (hence I dont use them if I can get away with it).

        Second is that they are marginally less efficient than perl style for loops. Granted this isnt the best argument, but combined with the former its IMO pretty good reasoning that avoiding them is a good way to reduce error, speed up your code and leave a more maintainable product (the later is excellent justifiction IMO).

        it isn't there so people can complain about its usage

        No its there to make C programmers feel more at home. Presumably a C programmer has already learned the subtleties of this style of loop and so will not make the common errors as often. This doesnt mean that it should be recommended or even overlooked, especially as the alternative is so much superior.

        As for your solution ++. splice() is one of those tools that I have yet to become entirely comfortable with. I suppose its something I should try to use more often.

        Good post, thanks.

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

[reply]
      Hi it's Bongo! Just wanted to tell you that your one line of code fixed the problem. And thanks to everyone else who answered...you all gave me things to ponder.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom