Sorry, i was probably too terse. I wasnt suggestingthat this was a good replacement for your code, just that it was possible.
In reply to Re^3: This could have DWIM better
by demerphq
in thread This could have DWIM better
by Aristotle
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |