Re^2: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it?

talking about elegance

IMHO additional parentheses improve the readability, emphasizing that the match-op is evaluated in a list-context. *

@a = ( "abcdefg" =~ /.{1,$ml}/g )  ;
[download]

or alternatively an extra newline

@a =
    "abcdefg" =~ /.{1,$ml}/g ;
[download]

well maybe a matter of taste ...

* UPDATE: well it's not evaluated in list-context, but it empasizes the order of evaluation, making it IMHO more readable..

Comment on Re^2: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by JavaFan (Canon) on Nov 04, 2008 at 16:54 UTC
IMHO additional parentheses improve the readability, emphasizing that the match-op is evaluated in a list-context. That's a really bad reason to use parenthesis, because they do NOT provide list context. Compare: `$a = ("abcdefg" =~ /.{1,$ml}/g);` [download] Here parenthesis are used, but the match is in scalar context.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by LanX (Saint) on Nov 04, 2008 at 17:11 UTC
UPDATE:(Dec 1. 2008) further down the thread I admit and show that I was wrong in this node! No need to discuss it further I don't think so, IMHO you are getting at first hand a list which is later reevaluated in scalar context! ... I'll run some tests to find the "truth" ; ) UPDATE: I think your example is equivalent to `my @a= ( $str =~ /.{1,$ml}/g ) ; $a=scalar @a; print $a;` [download] nevertheless is =~ evaluated in list-context!	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Nov 04, 2008 at 17:33 UTC
It's not in that one case either. Except when empty, parens never do more than control precedence. Except when empty, they never create a list context. It's almost always used with lists because "`,`" has very low precedence, but it's the commas that create the list, not the parens.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by LanX (Saint) on Nov 04, 2008 at 17:41 UTC
Re^6: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by LanX (Saint) on Nov 30, 2008 at 11:17 UTC
Re^7: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by gone2015 (Deacon) on Nov 30, 2008 at 13:22 UTC
Re^7: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Nov 30, 2008 at 15:37 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^5: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by LanX (Saint) on Nov 04, 2008 at 17:28 UTC
I apologize, you were right! `$a= ( test() ); print $a; #> 9 sub test { return (1,2) if wantarray; return 9; }` [download] the paranthesis don't force list context, they seem to be interpreted for the precedence of the lexer!	[reply] [d/l]