Re: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array

don't know if it's the "most elegant way", but if you don't want to generate an array, count the blanks, e.g.:

my $entries = 1;
s/\s/$entries++/eg;
[download]

Comment on Re: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array by blazar (Canon) on May 03, 2006 at 10:21 UTC
No, no, no, that would modify the original string in a most probably unwanted way. And if you really wanted to do it, then probably it should have been `\s+`. But you do not want to do so: a match would be better suited.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array by lima1 (Curate) on May 03, 2006 at 14:37 UTC
I know that of course. It is just one quick n dirty way to count blanks (therefore the "e.g." ). but the goatse thing is nicer, i must admit	[reply]