Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2003
"John M. Dlugosz" (via RT) <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote: :The documentation in the "perlrun" page says the assumed code is : while(<>) :in a few places. Deparse actually shows it as : while (defined($_ = <ARGV>)) :Thinking about it again, I suppose this is indeed a correct :explaination since while(<>) expands magically itself into the :latter. But, I think showing the full form in the documentation :here is better because not many people know that the 'defined' was :added to the while-diamond magic, it can be confusing that the :docs don't look like the results you get if you check for yourself, :and anyone who really cares about the generated code beyond the basic :textual description is doing something funny and telling him the :full story is better and more immediatly useful. Hmm, do many of the people that don't how we interpret C<< while (<>) >> these days know how to use Deparse? And wouldn't such people find out soon enough? While I appreciate your point, I can also see the benefit of keeping the equivalence code as simple as possible. I'd be inclined to leave it as it is, but I could maybe be swayed. HugoThread Previous