Re^3: Interpolation requires a spurious variable. Why?

Why should it be cleaner? It's just another case and depends on the context you want for the inner code.

Instead of a scalar you require a list to be interpolated into a string!

(which also involves the extra complication of setting $" appropiately.)

Cheers Rolf

Comment on Re^3: Interpolation requires a spurious variable. Why? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Interpolation requires a spurious variable. Why? by JavaFan (Canon) on Sep 29, 2009 at 10:29 UTC
It's just another case and depends on the context you want for the inner code. Not really. `"@{[ ... list context ... ]}";` [download] That's what everyone expects. But: `"${\(... list context ... )}";` [download] The reference operator (`\`) provides list context to its arguments. I've been bitten by this in the past as well.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Interpolation requires a spurious variable. Why? by LanX (Saint) on Sep 29, 2009 at 12:17 UTC
ups that's true, I forgot about this, Thx! :) Cheers Rolf	[reply]
Re^4: Interpolation requires a spurious variable. Why? by moritz (Cardinal) on Sep 24, 2009 at 13:42 UTC
Update please disregard, I should have read more carefully... It's cleaner because it also works when multiple elements are present: `use strict; use warnings; use 5.010; my ($a, $b) = (4, 5); say "@{ [$a // 2, $b] }"; # 4 5 say "@{\($a // 2, $b) }"; # Not an ARRAY reference at foo.pl l +ine 8.` [download] The feature of `\( LIST )` to return the same as `map \$_, LIST` is not always intuitive. Perl 6 - links to (nearly) everything that is Perl 6.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Interpolation requires a spurious variable. Why? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Sep 24, 2009 at 14:13 UTC
Noone suggested `@{\ }`. That would never work unless you had an array, in which case you don't need this trick at all. `@{[ ]}` was being compared to `${\ }` and/or `${\( )}`.	[reply] [d/l] [select]