I don't get why you're posting this.
Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly enough. the original post said Have fun sleuthing out what appears to be a problem with HTML::Tree but in fact has to do with my own oversight... good luck Sherlock!
I already solved the problem, but the trip-up was so easy to do, I thought it would be neat for someone else to try to figure out exactly how I erred.
It's like a detective story, only this time, you try to find the bug.
You don't tell us where your error was,
That's right. I did so intentionally. You pick up the clues as best you can...
what the path to the error location was, what your process of thinking was,
That's right - no clues... remember the title: 'sleuthing' ... all detectives have to do their own research!
or what enlightenment you found from pursuing the path up to the error.
Nope. Not at this stage... again: no clues. But there was a hint given - an imperative mindset where a functional paradigm was more succinct and less error-prone.
If you have a question about your code, please post in Seekers of Perl Wisdom.
Agreed. But this is a meditation because it involves problem solving where I already know the answer... but again, reading my original post (and the title), maybe I could've made my status with this 'problem' a bit clearer.
I thought it would be interesting for others to try and solve a problem, but based on the downvoting, apparently not... either that or they have the same misunderstanding that you do about it.
| [reply] |