Re^2: On Foreach Loops and Maintainability

And to take this a bit further, if there's no else, I'd write this like so:

for (map("arg$_", 1..5, 19), "gee37") {
    $object->method($_) or next;

    # ...
}
[download]

Fewer indentation levels are generally easier to read. Finding this at the bottom of a function always makes me scroll up and down a couple times:

                                   # ...
                              }
                        }
                  }
                  # play "guess the block this belongs to" here
                  $_ .= "something";
            }
      }
}
[download]

Makeshifts last the longest.

Comment on Re^2: On Foreach Loops and Maintainability Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re^2: On Foreach Loops and Maintainability by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 11, 2002 at 21:11 UTC
Is there a reason that the idea merlyn mentioned (that I think is a excellent use of perl) was comprehensively glossed over? I'd also try and do away with the if block but I think `cond or next;` reads a little unintuatively and would probably use `next unless cond;` `for ( 'arg1' .. 'arg5', "arg19", 'gee13' .. 'gee37' ) { next unless $object->method( $_ ); # do stuff }` [download] Cor! Like yer ring! ... HALO dammit! ... 'Ave it yer way! Hal-lo, Mister la-de-da. ... Like yer ring!	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: On Foreach Loops and Maintainability by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Oct 11, 2002 at 21:25 UTC
It depends on what I want to emphasize: I use `EXPR or next;` when a failure at that point is the exception. Of course, looking back at the original poster's code, there's nothing that says it is - and if not, I agree, I'd use a `next if`. I do so 95% of the time anyway. The flexibility of Perl's syntax allows a natural way of conveying emphasis, and I try to make use of that when appropriate. "Self explanatory" is usually my top goal. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]