Re^2: Net::Ping and STDOUT

Your hint about $| was right on the nose, thanks. I'll try to rewrite it with your stylistic input, thanks for that too. I thought that there had to be cleaner way to do the loop, but I'm not familiar with the idioms of perl.

Comment on Re^2: Net::Ping and STDOUT

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Net::Ping and STDOUT by blazar (Canon) on Aug 04, 2005 at 17:45 UTC
Well, my coding style isn't the bible. I would say it doesn't differ much from the average one of most perl programmers with some experience, but I'm sure some people would disagree. For example I like very much to use short-circuiting logical operators for flow control. And at times I tend to overuse `$_`. If it were me chances are that the main loop may have looked like this: `for my $net (@net) { for (16..250) { local $_="$net.$_"; warn "$_ not responding!\n" and next if !$p->ping($_); print; } }` [download] And while it's very clear and immediate to me I understand that others' opinion may vary, and expressive variable name like `$host` may be preferable for maintainability resons. Also, if the script were only just a bunch of lines longer, I would have never used the `-l` switch. Of course I'm eagerly waiting for (Perl6's) `say()`.	[reply] [d/l] [select]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: Net::Ping and STDOUT
by blazar (Canon) on Aug 04, 2005 at 17:45 UTC

$_

for my $net (@net) {
    for (16..250) {
            local $_="$net.$_";
            warn "$_ not responding!\n" and next
              if !$p->ping($_);
            print;
        }
}
[download]

$host

Also, if the script were only just a bunch of lines longer, I would have never used the -l switch. Of course I'm eagerly waiting for (Perl6's) say().

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]