You are misrepresenting what I have said, and it starts to look deliberate.

My point being, that you are still passing on information you have read, as advice or preference or low, without having examined reasoning behind it, or having applied your own reasoning to it; or concluded that it is good advice, preference or law on the basis of your own experience.

This is not so. I only made a two-line post just trying to understand why the OP wanted to change the map in the code presented, and saying that, in my personal opinion, a for or foreach construct would be clearer in that case. Not that I read it somewhere or someone told me, my own experience tells me that this is the case.

In my next post, I said this:

I was just expressing a matter of personal taste that it may not be the best style. Others may have different opinions on that.
Still not repeating something I have read, stating clearly that it is a personal opinion of mine.

I am forced to quote the official Perldoc map documentation and the Camel Book only because you are tweaking the map functionality by saying something like:

map maps a function over a list; optionally returning a new list.

There, you are basically making the claim that the return list is a secondary effect of map. This claim is just preposterous and you know better than that. BTW, another quote from the official Perldoc documentation on map:

Map always returns a list.
But quoting the official documentation is probably just repeating cargo cult, isn't it?

And the only reason I said that the quote from the Camel Book was in a programming Style section was just to set the matter straight that it was not previous section on efficiency and performance.

I am sorry that this discussion turned this way, I certainly did not want to have this type of argument with you. Again, I respect very much your opinions, but that does not mean that I have to agree will all of them. Agreeing with everything you said might indeed be repeating cargo-cult, I have enough experience to have my own opinion. I do not think that I want to continue arguing. You may have the last word.

In reply to Re^8: Write code diferently by Laurent_R
in thread Write code diferently by madM

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.