Re: Playing with non-localized $

This is highly educational for me, thanks very much for posting it. I must admit that I use $_ very sparingly, partly because I don't understand such things very well. I think it's also because of my longstanding habit of being very explicit (C, need I say more?). I'm still getting used to lines like

while (<>) {
  chomp;
  print $_, "\n";
}
[download]

because my old habits say "Where did $_ come from???" Going through such exercises as the above is helping me learn better, more Perlish ways.
I think it's fun and worthwhile to play with such things. And I'm not surprised at being confused on a Monday morning.

Comment on Re: Playing with non-localized $_ in nested loops. Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Playing with non-localized $_ in nested loops. by QM (Parson) on Aug 23, 2004 at 22:06 UTC
Don't be too quick to knock your approach. I find it useful in "real" programs to use a named variable to indicate to my reader (me in most cases :) what I expect that variable to represent. This is especially useful in nested constructs where `$_`'s semantics change as construct boundaries are crossed. And if I change a `foreach (...)` to a `while (...)`, the magic of `$_` disappears, and I might introduce bugs similar to gaal's example. Sometimes using explicit variables helps you find logic errors too. -QM -- Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Playing with non-localized $_ in nested loops.
by QM (Parson) on Aug 23, 2004 at 22:06 UTC

$_

And if I change a foreach (...) to a while (...), the magic of $_ disappears, and I might introduce bugs similar to gaal's example.

Sometimes using explicit variables helps you find logic errors too.

-QM
--
Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]