Re^12: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it?

Notice how the LHS is a list even though there's no parens? You're confusing cause and effect. "($a)" is a list because "=" is a list assignment operator. "=" being a list assignment operator isn't caused by "($a)" being a list.

I have no doubt that the implementation on the opcode-level is differently done, BUT I'm arguing you can tell on the perl-level!

Do you know any perlcode, where () and (1,2) reacts as a list and (1) does not???

My thesis is that the implemantation is transparent in this aspect and one can easily say ($a) is a one element list to a "normal" perl programmer! Can you find any contradictory perl code? I can't!

Like in physics the easiest model is always preferable as long as you can't get to the extreme borders.

For instance as long as Bohr's Model predicts all experiments in your laboratory it's a sufficient model, no matter how complicated the underlying Quantum Mechanics are.

In other words: Normal Perl programmers don't need to see the matrix, Neo! 8 ) Or do you know an example where the matrix effects normal live??? I'm really eager to know ...

Cheers Rolf

Comment on Re^12: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^13: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Dec 01, 2008 at 13:52 UTC
Do you know any perlcode, where () and (1,2) reacts as a list and (1) does not??? My point is that parens have nothing to do with it, so I'm not sure what you are trying to prove. Do you know any perlcode where `1,2` reacts as a list and `1` does not?	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^14: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by LanX (Saint) on Dec 01, 2008 at 14:07 UTC
> so I'm not sure what you are trying to prove. I'm trying to find a resonable simple model to understand perl's syntax! Thumbrules which are alway true! Kind of "Ducktyping" where the opcode details do not matter! With other words: Do you really want to tell a beginner that parens on LHS make "=" act like aassign instead of sassign??? do you understand me now? Cheers Rolf	[reply]
Re^15: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Dec 01, 2008 at 14:21 UTC
I say "parens force a list assignment", not "parens force a list". The concepts are already simple. I don't need to make up rules to keep it simple. That only leads to making up more rules on the fly.	[reply]
Re^16: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by LanX (Saint) on Dec 01, 2008 at 14:29 UTC
Re^17: chopping a string into slices - is there a more elegant way to do it? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Dec 01, 2008 at 16:02 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here