Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from May 2001
Bryan C. Warnock sniped:
> > > Okay, this part has me confused.
> >
> > And rightly so: it was a screw-up. I lost track of whether I was keeping
> > the property on the value or on the node reference and ended up doing
> > both.
>
> What? You didn't test it before you posted it? For shame! ;-)
Of course, I tested it! As I explained:
Interestingly, the code still *worked* since the (originally
unset) property on the node reference would have returned
C<undef> which would undergo the usual boolean conversion in the
C<if>, and the usual promotion to zero in the numerical context
of the increment.
The point is that (as in Perl 5) neither of these two cases of undef
promotion trigger a warning, so there was nothing to alert me to the
fact that the initialization of the value was redundant!
;-)
Damian
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next