Thanks for pointing this obscure but oh-so-potentially useful behaviour out.
I see the "considered dangerous" phrase. Is it?
I found the (somewhat breif) description of it in perlop. As I discovered yesterday, writing code to reproduce this behaviour yourself is annoyingly difficult, but in the application of generating test data amongst others, would be very useful.
Would you use this in production code? Do you have any insight as to whether the behaviour is likely to remain in place or is it deprecated or destined to disappear sometime soon?
Okay you lot, get your wings on the left, halos on the right. It's one size fits all, and "No!", you can't have a different color.
Pick up your cloud down the end and "Yes" if you get allocated a grey one they are a bit damp under foot, but someone has to get them.
Get used to the wings fast cos its an 8 hour day...unless the Govenor calls for a cyclone or hurricane, in which case 16 hour shifts are mandatory.
Just be grateful that you arrived just as the tornado season finished. Them buggers are real work.
In reply to Re: •range-based magical autoincrement
by BrowserUk
in thread range-based magical autoincrement
by merlyn
For: | Use: | ||
& | & | ||
< | < | ||
> | > | ||
[ | [ | ||
] | ] |