in reply to Re: given-when last time through loop?
in thread given-when last time through loop?

Hi,

Thanks for the response.

It seems that if you use for instead of given as the outer control structure, it defaults to next instead of break.

Ok. I did read this in the perlsyn docs:

On exit from the when block, there is an implicit next.

...but I found the 'on exit' language confusing. I thought they meant after the last when block. There should be a better example in the docs--that is a major change from using given-when on its own outside a loop.

The docs could simply say, "Inside a for-loop, the when blocks end with an implicit next rather than an implicit break.

  • Comment on Re^2: given-when last time through loop?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: given-when last time through loop?
by moritz (Cardinal) on Nov 19, 2009 at 14:47 UTC
    I've now submitted this patch to the perl 5 porters, in the hope that it's a bit clearer: 
    diff --git a/pod/perlsyn.pod b/pod/perlsyn.pod
index d5fc4a7..4e1bc0a 100644
--- a/pod/perlsyn.pod
+++ b/pod/perlsyn.pod
@@ -679,7 +679,7 @@ string occurs in an array:
     }
     print "\@array contains $count copies of 'foo'\n";
 
-On exit from the C<when> block, there is an implicit C<next>.
+At the end of all C<when> blocks, there is an implicit C<next>.
 You can override that with an explicit C<last> if you're only
 interested in the first match.

    [download]

    So far I've found the porters very cooperative when it comes to doc patches, and I want to encourage everybody to submit patches when they find something that can be improved in the docs.

    Perl 6 - links to (nearly) everything that is Perl 6.
[reply]
[d/l]
      That's wrong. It should be "At the end of every C<when> block"
[reply]

      Forgive me for criticizing, but I don't think that highlights the change that occurs. Now the docs will have two contradictory statements: one statement will say there are implicit breaks, and this new statement will say there are implicit nexts. I think some readers may get confused and believe that one of them is a typo. I think, something like the following would highlight that a change occurs from implict breaks to implicit nexts:

      Inside a for-loop, a when block ends with an implicit next rather than an implicit break.

[reply]
        You're right. You should reply to my p5p mail with a better patch.
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom