of course i read your post; the original post was about the efficiency of the various techniques! i generally prefer the shifting technique, perhaps cause my editor nicely syntax-colours the my's. 90% of the time it's purely aesthetics, though sometimes one method will lend itself to a particular technique; such as when the second or third argument is a (long) list or hash. TIMTOWTDI.
besides, it's going to be a moot point in perl6; everything will be named in the method signature.
but i agree. readability and maintainability are almost always preferable to 5% faster execution. there's no way i could hold a team of 6 and 100K lines of perl together if i didn't think so :-)
In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Shift versus Sanity
by d_i_r_t_y
in thread Shift versus Sanity
by tadman
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |