Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2000
Ronald J Kimball wrote:
> C<undef + 4>, C<"hi!" . undef>, and C< undef << 2 > could all result in
> undef, and that would be a reasonable implementation, but it's not how Perl
> works.
That's not what I'm arguing here. I'm not arguing that substr(undef, 0)
should return undef necessarily. I'm arguing that substr(undef, 1)
should return whatever substr(undef, 0). I don't CARE which. undef or
"", take your pick, but don't flip-flop based on positional logic.
Seeing substr behave this way gives me the creepy feeling that I'm
looking at C code which reads:
char s[]="Hello, world";
s[0]=(char)NULL;
printf("%s", &s[1]); /* See! It's still there! */
That's my position, and I'm sticking to it. At least until I've had a
good night's sleep and still think that substr beyond-the-end-of-undef
should behave that way.
How do I measure undef? Let me count the ways.
I measure thee to the depth and breadth and height
My undef can reach, when feeling out of sight
For the ends of NULL and empty arrays.
--
Clinton A. Pierce Teach Yourself Perl in 24 Hours!
clintp@geeksalad.org for details see http://www.geeksalad.org
"If you rush a Miracle Man,
you get rotten Miracles." --Miracle Max, The Princess Bride
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next