Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2012
* Aaron Priven <aaron@priven.com> [2012-07-06T02:15:24]
> sub in {
> my $member = shift;
> for (@_) {
> return 1 if $member eq $_;
> }
> return q{};
> }
>
>
> Except for the use of "eq", it doesn't assume anything about the type of
> anything. And inferring numeric / string from the operator is what, I
> thought, Perl did. Hence the suggestion of a numeric "in" operator.
>
> That's not to say it's necessarily worth doing. Maybe, as Aaron Crane
> suggests, it's not "powerful enough to justify its own existence."
The use of "eq" is the primary type issue. If we need a numeric in, then now
we're talking about *two* operators to justify, each with one very specific
use. On the other hand, you can use any() with all sorts of comparitors and
values.
--
rjbs
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next