Re^7: When every microsecond counts: Parsing subroutine parameters

I have occasionally desired say $x,,,,$y to be a shortcut for $x,undef,undef,undef,$y.
Be happy that you need the undef! Counting the nothings between the commas must be one of the most frustrating exercises ever devised.

CountZero

A program should be light and agile, its subroutines connected like a string of pearls. The spirit and intent of the program should be retained throughout. There should be neither too little or too much, neither needless loops nor useless variables, neither lack of structure nor overwhelming rigidity." - The Tao of Programming, 4.1 - Geoffrey James

Comment on Re^7: When every microsecond counts: Parsing subroutine parameters Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: When every microsecond counts: Parsing subroutine parameters by blazar (Canon) on May 19, 2008 at 18:53 UTC
I personally believe that's why I occasionally desire it, as opposed to constantly. Having stared at csv files with empty fields, I know what you mean, except that in that case the task can even be facilitated by the formatting of some fields. However there's a difference between say, fifteen adjacent commas and two or three. Anyway that's not something to be changed, so it's not worth discussing either. OTOH I often feel the need for some syntactical sugar to indicate a "missing something," whereas `undef`, however short, is somewhat obtrusive: Perl is already a hell to parse, but how 'bout a lonely minus sign? `my $x = foo(42,-,-,'cool');` [download] `--` If you can't understand the incipit, then please check the IPB Campaign.	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^8: When every microsecond counts: Parsing subroutine parameters
by blazar (Canon) on May 19, 2008 at 18:53 UTC

I personally believe that's why I occasionally desire it, as opposed to constantly.

Having stared at csv files with empty fields, I know what you mean, except that in that case the task can even be facilitated by the formatting of some fields. However there's a difference between say, fifteen adjacent commas and two or three. Anyway that's not something to be changed, so it's not worth discussing either. OTOH I often feel the need for some syntactical sugar to indicate a "missing something," whereas undef, however short, is somewhat obtrusive: Perl is already a hell to parse, but how 'bout a lonely minus sign?

my $x = foo(42,-,-,'cool');
[download]

--
If you can't understand the incipit, then please check the IPB Campaign.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]