Re^2: if expression

#! perl -w scipt use strict; use warnings;
[download]

Good! But then no need for -w.

Actually, -w and use warnings are scoped differently. -w is dynamically scoped (i.e. it's a global), while use warnings is file/block scoped. In other words, -w affects modules, but use warnings only affects the file its in.

"scipt" should not be there, however.

So why not avoiding to use the intermediate variable @files and just do

for (<*.sql>) { # I never use C<foreach> ;-)
[download]

Why load the entire list into memory? Just use:

while (<*.sql>) {
   ...
[download]

# I still prefer C<for> orver C<foreach>!!
[download]

I use for for for loops (e.g. for (1..100)) and foreach for foreach loops (e.g. foreach (@array)). Using for unconditionally as you do is bad programming, since it affects the ability to read your program negatively.

Comment on Re^2: if expression Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: if expression by blazar (Canon) on Sep 16, 2005 at 15:14 UTC
Actually, -w and use warnings are scoped differently. -w is dynamically scoped (i.e. it's a global), while use warnings is file/block scoped. In other words, -w affects modules, but use warnings only affects the file its in. Indeed. The point being that since he has `use warnings;` anyway, he most probably doesn't want `-w` on the shebang line, leaving aside `"scipt"`, for the moment. All in all that looked much like cargo cult to me... `for (<.sql>) { # I never use C<foreach> ;-)` [download] Why load the entire list into memory? Just use: Oh, how many `.sql` files can he have?!? But jokes apart, I second that: `while` is certainly better, well: until we'll have lazy evaluation!! `while (<.sql>) { ...` [download] In fact. Except that, as a minor* note, you'd probably need to give it a name. And as an even minor note, to avoid confusion with the typical filehandle iterator idiom, I'd write an explicit glob there. I use for for for loops (e.g. for (1..100)) and foreach for foreach loops (e.g. foreach (@array)). Using for unconditionally as you do is bad programming, since it affects the ability to read your program negatively. I beg to differ: I find both quite as readable and synonims also in the psychological feeling they give. And I find `for` to be easier both to think of and to type. Using `foreach` would affect negatively readability for me and avoiding to use it IMHO doesn't severly injure it for others. As many other things in Perl, it's largely a matter of personal tastes; I wouldn't be so drastic about it. Of course I'm not trying or even thinking of imposing my own point of view, either. Period!	[reply] [d/l] [select]
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.