reverse of string

msk_0984 has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: reverse of string by derby (Abbot) on May 20, 2006 at 12:38 UTC
It's all about context. reverse ~~by default works on a list~~ in this case is in list context. Since there's only one list item ("dog"), it's printed out. In the second example, ucfirst forces the reverse into scalar context and in scalar context, reverse, combines all the elements of the list and returns the string value of that combination in reverse order. -derby Update: Doh!! adrianh is correct.	[reply]
Re^2: reverse of string by adrianh (Chancellor) on May 20, 2006 at 16:46 UTC
reverse by default works on a list `<niggle>` Nope. reverse doesn't have a default behaviour. In list context it reverses a list. In scalar context it reverses a string. The print puts the reverse into a list context, hence the behaviour that confused the OP. `</niggle>`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: reverse of string by borisz (Canon) on May 20, 2006 at 12:41 UTC
`print reverse 'dog';` `reverse` is in list context and reverts a list of someting. your list has only one entry 'dog'. for `print ucfirst reverse "dog";` `reverse` is in scalar context and reverts a string instead of a list. Boris	[reply]
Re: reverse of string by Cody Pendant (Prior) on May 20, 2006 at 12:41 UTC
In order to reverse a string, you need to use `print scalar reverse "dog"` [download] because reverse expects an array unless told otherwise. So ... because ucfirst is forcing scalar context onto "reverse"? ($_='kkvvttuu bbooppuuiiffss qqffssmm iibbddllffss') =~y~b-v~a-z~s; print	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: reverse of string by msk_0984 (Friar) on May 22, 2006 at 06:05 UTC
Thanx for your reply, Most of them said it since it by default considers as a list so anyway its good that you have also sent me the code to print it thank you Sushil	[reply]
Re: reverse of string by zerogeek (Monk) on May 20, 2006 at 15:50 UTC
This being the first node that I have read that references "God", I thought it odd that the node# ended in 666... Must be an idle thread running through my brain this morning ;)	[reply]