Re^2: (Mis)Understanding <c>grep...eq $

It makes no sense to use it on scalars.

Hey, that's not such a bad idea. For conditional inclusion in lists, instead of something like:

    @foo = (
        ...
        ( $include_bar ? 'bar' : () )
        ...
    );
[download]

you'd have

    @foo = (
        ...
        grep( $include_bar, 'bar' )
        ...
    );
[download]

--
Online Fortune Cookie Search
Office Space merchandise

Comment on Re^2: (Mis)Understanding <c>grep...eq $_<c> Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: (Mis)Understanding grep...eq $_ (versus ex-bang-bang) by grinder (Bishop) on Feb 24, 2009 at 07:50 UTC
Ooh, nice! That's eminently readable. Much more likely to survive a code review than aristotle's ex-bang-bang operator. Rather than `my @part = ( 'http://example.net/app', ( 'admin' ) x!! $is_admin_link, ( $subsite ) x!! defined $subsite, $mode, ( $id ) x!! defined $id, ( $submode ) x!! defined $submode, );` [download] we would now have `my @part = ( 'http://example.net/app', grep( $is_admin_link. 'admin' ), grep( defined($subsite), $subsite ), $mode, grep( defined($id), $id ), grep( defined($submode), $submode ), );` [download] I like it. • another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: (Mis)Understanding grep...eq $_ (versus ex-bang-bang) by parv (Parson) on Feb 24, 2009 at 08:08 UTC
What is the difference?	[reply]
Re^5: (Mis)Understanding grep...eq $_ (versus ex-bang-bang) by grinder (Bishop) on Feb 24, 2009 at 23:39 UTC
None. I dare say the ex-bang-bang approach is faster, but then I would be rightly accused of premature optimisation. The grep approach, while slower (but at a cost approaching zero) is more easily figured out from first principles. The effect of `x!!` is not easily discerned; one has to write a harness to explore its behaviour. Either because one has encountered a similar idiom in a different language and wants to see if Perl matches expectations based on prior experience, or else they have not the faintest idea of what it does (and once one sees what it does, can they determine why?) So in summary, there is a difference. One is tricksy, the other is merely degenerate. • another intruder with the mooring in the heart of the Perl	[reply]