use List::MoreUtils qw/any/;

sub is_in_num {
   my $matcher = shift;
   any { $matcher == $_} @{$_[0]}
}

sub is_in_str {
   my $matcher = shift;
   any { $matcher eq $_} @{$_[0]}
}
[download]

For more general advice on how to refactor code like that, read Higher-Order Perl.

Thanks for the link. I think that's what I needed to find for several issues in my code.

For more general advice on how to refactor code like that, read Higher-Order Perl.

particularly Chapter 5: From Recursion to Iterators

?? List::AllUtils::http://search.cpan.org/perldoc/List::AllUtils#any_BLOCK_LIST#any?

use List::AllUtils qw/ any /;
sub is_in_num {
  my( $num, $list ) = @_;
  return any { $num == $_ } @$list;
}
sub is_in_str {
  my( $str, $list ) = @_;
  return any { $str eq $_ } @$list;
}
[download]

Smart matching?? http://perldoc.perl.org/perlop.html#Smartmatch-Operator

use 5.010;
*is_in_num = *is_in_str = sub {
  my( $str, $list ) = @_;
  return $str ~~ $list;
};
[download]

I like the smart matching operator. Haven't seen that one before. Thanks for the solutions!

See also the 2007 thread Equality checking for strings AND numbers, which may give you some useful ideas.

And note the point raised there by BrowserUk:

If your data can contain reals, you might want to think about whether 10.0 == 10.000000000000001, or not.

and the replies by lin0 and halley on how to handle this issue.

HTH,

But, really, , responding to the title, the better way to write a check is to enter ww in the 'pay to the order of' section; your account balance in the word$ and number$ for the amount; and, of course sign the check on the bottom line.

ps: Postdated checks accepted only for the current month.

Here is my code which takes inputs from command line.

my ($item, @l1) = @ARGV;
print ((grep  $item eq $_ , @l1) ? "found" : "sorry");
[download]

Inputs can be:

$ perl code.pl 23 24 25 23 #outputs "found"

$ perl code.pl perl monks are great #outputs "sorry"

Is that same as the OPs code?

Is @ARGV is a substitute for @_?

Is print a substitute for return?

Is a program a substitute for a subroutine?

Is that same as the OPs code?
No, it shows another technique of accomplishing the desired result.

Is @ARGV is a substitute for @_?
No. See perlvar. @ARGV holds the command line arguments given to the script, @_ holds the arguments given to the subroutine. Interestingly, operators like shift know to work on @_ inside subroutines and on @ARGV in the main execution block. So the following two scripts will show the same output:

printf "Got %s!\n", shift while @ARGV;
[download]

use subs qw(printfor);
printfor @ARGV;
sub printfor {
    my $f = shift;
    printf "Got %s!\n", shift while @_;
}
[download]

Is print a substitute for return?
No. return is used inside subroutines to give back data to the calling code, print is used to generate output, which could be sent to the screen or a file handle, or it could be passed to function as another program's input using pipeline constructions. Among other things

Is a program a substitute for a subroutine?
Not really, although it's definitely possible to make another program do some work for you as if it were a subroutine. Shell scripting often works like that.