Re^5: "a bit of sugar "(HOP)

Quoting HOP, [prototyping means that]:

when we write this:
Iterator { ... }
Perl behaves as though we had written:
Iterator(sub { ... })

It allows the passing of a code reference to the Iterator subroutine, and is elsewhere compared to map { ... } @array and grep { ... } @array.

Comment on Re^5: "a bit of sugar "(HOP) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: "a bit of sugar "(HOP) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Mar 13, 2009 at 19:09 UTC
That explains absolutely nothing. You don't need `sub Iterator(&)` to make `sub {...}` have the same form as `map {...}` and `grep {...}`. It already has that form. goto 750492;	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^7: "a bit of sugar "(HOP) by hbm (Hermit) on Mar 13, 2009 at 20:12 UTC
make sub {...} have the same form as map {...} and grep {...}. I didn't say that; I said that prototyping allows `Iterator` to behave like `map { ... }` and `grep { ... }`. And I agree, it also allows `Iterator` to behave like `sub { ... }`. Meanwhile, curious about the origination of "syntactic sugar", I found this quote: Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semicolon; And a hundred other goodies at http://www.cs.yale.edu/quotes.html.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^8: "a bit of sugar "(HOP) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Mar 13, 2009 at 21:05 UTC
I didn't say that; I said that prototyping allows Iterator to behave like map { ... } and grep { ... }. Then you're assuming `Iterator(sub {...})` is the starting point, and that's nonsense. `sub { ... }` is the starting point, and it's already syntactically similar to `map { ... }` and `grep { ... }`. To say that `(&)` is needed to create the iterator while using the BLOCK syntax of `map` and `grep` is untrue. `(&)` is therefore irrelevant to the question at hand. Using `Iterator` is the sugar. It conveys information to the user without any effect on the program. `(&)` is only the means to make it happen.	[reply] [d/l] [select]