Re: Better way to write these checks?

in reply to Better way to write these checks?

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.

Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

Comment on Re: Better way to write these checks? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Better way to write these checks? by Ransom (Beadle) on Jun 29, 2012 at 12:44 UTC
Thanks for the link. I think that's what I needed to find for several issues in my code.	[reply]
Re^2: Better way to write these checks? by Anonymous Monk on Jun 29, 2012 at 12:50 UTC
For more general advice on how to refactor code like that, read Higher-Order Perl. particularly Chapter 5: From Recursion to Iterators	[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom