broquaint

Thanks for the suggestion. I was thinking Array::Findone myeself.

While there is a findfirst function, the difference is findone knows where it is within an array, so on subsequent calls it gives subsequent elements. "sort-of" like a closure without the closure. Basically it knows from the source code context what array you are using.



# It's does something similar to this.
sub elementer(&\@;$$) {
    my ($coderef,$arrayref,$start_index,$end_index) = @_;

    
    $start_index = 0 unless $start_index;
    $end_index = $#{$arrayref} unless $end_index;

    return sub {
            return if $start_index > $end_index;
            for  (; $start_index <= $end_index;$start_index++){
                
                $_ = $arrayref->[$start_index];
                if (&$coderef){
                    $start_index++;
                    return wantarray ?  ($_ ,($start_index -1 ) ) : $_
+;
                }
            }    
        }


}


my @nums = (1..1000);
my $find = elementer { "$_" =~m/5$/ } @nums ;

while (my $found = $find->() ) {
     # ... do something with each match
    print $found,"\n";
}
[download]



-Lee

"To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

Hmmmm, maybe it's name should note it's iterating ability, such as Array::Iterate::Conditional or Array::Iterate::Search. I think they would give a clearer idea of what the module will do.
HTH

broquaint

or if you're feeling verbose and in a trend-setting mood Array::Find::One.

For what it's worth, a few months ago, there was a discussion on the Date-Time mailing list, in which a few people disapproved of 3-level module names. I do not understand why, but if you encounter those people, maybe you'll have to stick with (for example) Array::FindOne.

Thanks. I like Array::FindOne myself but I don't neccassarily think like other people. I prefer two levels unless there is a semantic reason like Net::Service::SomeService. Thanks for the feedback.


-Lee

"To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

dave hj~

Thanks for the suggestion. I'm kind of stuck on the findone part of the name.
(I should have been more clear in my original post. I was thinking more of the toplevel namespace.)
While it may sound stubborn, but the whole purpose of making this construct (for me) was it was in a proprietary LISP'ish' type language that I used to use and I missed it. (About the only thing I did miss.) The construct just fits the way I think logic.

-Lee

"To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

Why don't we just add this functionality to Set::Scalar or Set::Array? :)

Since the module provides both findone and findfirst, why not simply call it Array::Find?

--rjray

I liked Array::FindOne myself but Array::Find I think is clearer to the modules intent.

Thanks,
-Lee

"To be civilized is to deny one's nature."