Re: Generate the perl sequence 1, 11, 111, ....

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Generate the perl sequence 1, 11, 111, .... by blazar (Canon) on Oct 11, 2008 at 11:03 UTC
I personally believe that a "better" s-based solution was already posted by jwkrahn, in particular: there's no need to match a `1` at the end of the string, and avoiding to do so could generalize the code to spit out the sequence to begin with zero `1`'s - not that anybody requested it, but it's such a tiny violation of YAGNI for both a simpler syntax and added flexibility that I would only avoid it if it were expressedly ruled out; we recommend not to use `$a` and `$b` as general purpose variables all the time, which would be especially important here, given that the OP is clearly a newbie; this thread is clearly facetious in many ways, but as a general programming rule, it's awkward and error prone that you somehow unnecessarily duplicate information, holding it in two variables where one would suffice: namely in `$a` as the length of `$a` itself and in `$b` as an integer, whereas the two quantities are fundamentally the same. Once you use only one variable, perhaps taking advantage of `$_` to use smart defaults, and switching to the `while` statement modifier, your code could be morphed into: `perl -le 's/$/1/, print while 100 > length'` [download] Incidentally, now that I notice, the anchor is not necessary at all. If it were not for a mandatory `/e` modifier, this could make for a golfed solution just as good as JavaFan's `perl -E'{s//say/e,redo}'` [download] but that's not the case... `--` If you can't understand the incipit, then please check the IPB Campaign.	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^2: Generate the perl sequence 1, 11, 111, ....
by blazar (Canon) on Oct 11, 2008 at 11:03 UTC

I personally believe that

a "better" s-based solution was already posted by jwkrahn, in particular:
there's no need to match a 1 at the end of the string, and avoiding to do so could generalize the code to spit out the sequence to begin with zero 1's - not that anybody requested it, but it's such a tiny violation of YAGNI for both a simpler syntax and added flexibility that I would only avoid it if it were expressedly ruled out;
we recommend not to use $a and $b as general purpose variables all the time, which would be especially important here, given that the OP is clearly a newbie;
this thread is clearly facetious in many ways, but as a general programming rule, it's awkward and error prone that you somehow unnecessarily duplicate information, holding it in two variables where one would suffice: namely in $a as the length of $a itself and in $b as an integer, whereas the two quantities are fundamentally the same. Once you use only one variable, perhaps taking advantage of $_ to use smart defaults, and switching to the while statement modifier, your code could be morphed into:

perl -le 's/$/1/, print while 100 > length'
[download]

Incidentally, now that I notice, the anchor is not necessary at all. If it were not for a mandatory /e modifier, this could make for a golfed solution just as good as JavaFan's

perl -E'{s//say/e,redo}'
[download]

but that's not the case...

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

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]