Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2010
>On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 07:50:41AM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote: >> I simply reject their premise that or is ipso facto superior to >> || and I don't want to see that position promulgated as the gospel it <SNIP> >In the case of open(), I would argue that "or" is superior to "||" because it >works whether there are parens or not. > open(my $fh, "<", "foo.txt") or die $!; > open my $fh, "<", "foo.txt" or die $!; >Isn't this exactly the sort of situation that low-precedence "or" was designed >for? Sigh. Yes, it is. That isn't my point. I don't read function calls without a ) as having their arguments terminated. The ) || works much, much, much better for me. I always use ||. Always. And I do *not* make precedence errors, because even if I forgot them, I also always use ). --tomThread Previous | Thread Next