Re^3: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array

GAWD! Well, the fact that you write "optimized" yourself suggests that it is really an unwanted side effect of an optimization... may I push it as far as to dare to say that it is a bug?

Well, another trick that I verified not to be flawed is:

my $count=map $_, split;
[download]

of course it doesn't just taste as good... hmmm, how 'bout:

my $count=+(split);  # ?!?
[download]

(also verified!)

$ perl -lpe '$_=+(split)'
foo
1
bar baz
2
[download]

Comment on Re^3: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array by salva (Canon) on May 03, 2006 at 11:15 UTC
may I push it as far as to dare to say that it is a bug? well, probably not, as it is well documented on `perlfunc` A workaround is to set the limit explicetly to `undef` (though, it generates a warning): `$count = () = split ' ', $_, undef;` [download] amazingly, setting it to 0 doesn't work: `$ perl -MO=Deparse -e '$a = () = split(" ", $_, undef)' $a = () = split(" ", $_, undef); $ perl -MO=Deparse -e '$a = () = split(" ", $_, 0)' $a = () = split(" ", $_, 1);` [download] A better workaround that doesn't generate warnings is to use a zero-but-true value: `$count = () = split ' ', $_, '0e0';` [download] that is parsed as: `$ perl -MO=Deparse -e '$a = () = split(" ", $_, "0e0")' $a = () = split(" ", $_, '0e0');` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on May 03, 2006 at 12:32 UTC
Well yeah, but aren't you just back to square one? `C:\test>perl -nwle"print $n = +(split)" Use of implicit split to @_ is deprecated at -e line 1. Name "main::n" used only once: possible typo at -e line 1. foo 1 foo bar 2` [download] Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal? "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: Counting the number of items returned by split without using a named array by blazar (Canon) on May 03, 2006 at 12:41 UTC
D'Oh! I forgot to -w when I tested it. It's incredible how annoying this little thing can be!!! All in all I would regard the assignment to `@_` and the connected warning as spurious, since split is not called in void context. But... they're there!	[reply] [d/l]