Re^4: c-style for loop versus list for loop, and bigint

Actually, I'm fairly certain that the conversion of the range operator from a list generator to an iterator happened long after bigint was available.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^4: c-style for loop versus list for loop, and bigint

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: c-style for loop versus list for loop, and bigint by LanX (Saint) on May 19, 2011 at 21:03 UTC
hmm could be, I was thinking of the operator not of the iterator, but when using reverse one should get a list like before and it doesn't help either: `use bigint; my $answer = 1; print ref $answer; # prints "Math::BigInt" for my $i (1..1) { print ref $i; # prints nothing } for my $i (reverse 1..2) { print ref $i; # prints nothing }` [download] Lets be honest, these kind of problems are one of the reasons why Python is more popular for scientific calculations. Cheers Rolf	[reply] [d/l]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^5: c-style for loop versus list for loop, and bigint
by LanX (Saint) on May 19, 2011 at 21:03 UTC

reverse

use bigint;
my $answer = 1;
print ref $answer;    # prints "Math::BigInt"
 
for my $i (1..1) {
  print ref $i;       # prints nothing
}
for my $i (reverse 1..2) {
  print ref $i;       # prints nothing
}
[download]

Lets be honest, these kind of problems are one of the reasons why Python is more popular for scientific calculations.

Cheers Rolf

[reply]
[d/l]