in reply to Algorithm::Diff icult to use

Nice!

Why one list, though? Wouldn't a LoL be simpler to use AND easily let the user see how many ranges there are? Well, I guess they can do scalar(@diff)/5, but that doesn't seem as intuitive.

I don't know if the sublists would cause too much memory overhead, but it shouldn't be anywhere near as bad as the problem you cite with A::Diff.

That's just a nit; it's nice and clean, and quite useable as is.
--
Mike

Edit: Hmmm, nevermind. I guess if I want an LoL I can just do 

my @diff2;
while(@diff) {
    push @diff2,[splice @diff,0,5];
}

[download]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Algorithm::Diff icult to use
by bart (Canon) on Aug 21, 2002 at 17:25 UTC
    Hmmm, nevermind.

    Actually, I agree with your LoL remark. Returning a flat list seems too low level. Plus, if for any reason a new field needs to be added, so the number is no longer 5, it would break all code using it.

    Modified, the code could look like: 

        my $diff= easy( \@a, \@b );
    foreach ( @$diff ) {
        my( $same, $aMin, $aMax, $bMin, $bMax )= @$_;
        ...  # rest of code snipped because unaltered
    }

    [download]

    or

        my $diff= easy( \@a, \@b );
    while (my $row = shift @$diff ) {
        my( $same, $aMin, $aMax, $bMin, $bMax )= @$row;
        ...  # rest of code snipped because unaltered
    }

    [download]

    Never mind the extra overhead (if any)... No?

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      Makes sense. You're right that "5" hardwired everywhere could cause trouble...

      Oh, and I like your foreach better than the shift approach. It's probably faster, and it's what foreach is for. :)
      --
      Mike

[reply]

In Section Meditations