Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2016
On 8 November 2016 at 11:35, Ed Avis <eda@waniasset.com> wrote:
> Dave Mitchell wrote:
>
>>For ranges, e.g. (1..10) and ('a'..'z'), it only records the current value and the last value.
>
> But for numeric ranges, if you know the current value it is just a subtraction to find its index.
> For string ranges like 'aa'..'zz' it is trickier but still possible. So fetching $# could do that?
>
>>give $# get magic that searches the context stack for a loop context,
>>then retrieves the current loop index stored in there. That wouldn't
>>slow down normal loops, but accessing $# itself might be quite slow.
>
> I think it would still be faster than the equivalent handwritten code using an $i variable, though?
>
> My concern would be whether in all cases 'searching the context stack for a loop'
> gives exactly the same semantics as we currently have for $_ in nested loops.
> Or whether the odd differences are not worth worrying about.
An alternative would be to introduce a new keyword, say "for_with_index".
Then you could say
for_with_index (LIST) {
}
and perl would know it has to do the extra bookkeeping to populate $#.
But personally I would not use $#, i would use something like ${^LOOP_INDEX}.
Yves
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next