develooper Front page | perl.fwp | Postings from March 2012

The sperm secret operator: is it new?

Thread Next
Philippe Bruhat
March 14, 2012 04:36
The sperm secret operator: is it new?
Message ID:

While doing some tests/research on secret operators, I stumbled upon this
one in my one-liners:


Obviously, this should be named "the sperm operator". It's only useful
in list context. Just like sperm cells work better when there are many
of them. ;-)

Now, if you want to get a number from that line you just read, you
could use this variation:


which we could name the fertilisation, conception, fecundation or
syngamy operator, except the flagella (~~) has become useless, since
the +0 operator (ovum?) already provides scalar context. So it's just
the same as <>+0.

I have no idea if this operator is really new, or if someone else found
and named it already before today. My Google-fu is too weak to make
useful searches on it.

 Philippe Bruhat (BooK)

 No matter who you may be, there is always someone who is a little worse
 because he thinks he is a little better.
                                     (Moral from Groo The Wanderer #3 (Epic))

Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About