Six of one, half a dozen of the other. You made the array explicit, I made the counter explicit. Personally, I prefer for split /,/, $row because it keeps the meat all on one easy-to-eat line. I'm also comfortable enough with C to be happy with the autoincrementing counter.

Didja benchmark them? (Kidding, of course.)

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";

I'm not sure, but pretty certain that your version is more efficient, and you're also right that I traded one variable for another.

The reason I prefer the version I posted is another, though: it has one less side effect. (I tried to do without the push too, but no practicable solution presented itself.) The fewer side effects, the more decoupled things become - f.ex, try changing your version such that it inserts an element from a different data source into a column determined by one of the fields of $row. That's a trivial change for the code I posted.

Makeshifts last the longest.

f.ex, try changing your version such that it inserts an element from a different data source into a column determined by one of the fields of $row. That's a trivial change for the code I posted.

OK, let's be specific. Say the other data source was another array (call it @b) and say column 2 held the index into that array. Then I might do it like this:

my @cols;
for my $row (@array) {
    my $i = 0;
    push @{$cols[$i++]}, $i % 2 ? $_ : $b[$_] for split /,/, $row;
}
[download]

I'd call that a pretty trivial change.

In general, that bit with the ternary operator could be replaced by any arbitrary code in a do{} block or a function that took, minimally, the index $i and the value $_ as arguments.

Six of one...

So, how would you do it with yours? :-)

-sauoq
"My two cents aren't worth a dime.";