I think its arguable that mine is closer to what (I see) is the spirit of L~R's original intention. That being to minimize the amount overhead especially that associated with the stack. I thought of using this approach, but decided against on the grounds that it involved an unreasonable amount of copying and stack manipulation. Heh. Whatever. In real life I would just use recursion on this most likely. :-)
Caveats about using is() and 0+$ref in the algorithm of course. Better to use Scalar::Util or parse overload::StrVal(). But you knew that, and its beside the point here isnt it. :-)
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
-- Gandhi
In reply to Re: Re^3: flattening a list-of-lists (simpler)
by demerphq
in thread flattening a list-of-lists
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |