Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2018
Philip R Brenan wrote:
> So far you do not appear to be missing anything. *for($a)* was
> ambiguous under the original implementation
----
It should never be "ambiguous". According to the language, it
should always resolve to a single value. In shell, using:
prog='P "perl-%s:", $];
my $aref = [ qw(one two three) ];
for ($aref) {P "%s", $_}'
then (in shell & various perl-bin dirs):
(probs building 5.6.2)
perl-5.8.9/usr/bin> PATH=$PWD:$PATH perl -MP -CSA -e "$prog"
perl-5.008009:
["one", "two", "three"]
perl-5.10.1/usr/bin> PATH=$PWD:$PATH perl -MP -CSA -e "$prog"
perl-5.010001:
["one", "two", "three"]
perl-5.12.5/usr/bin> PATH=$PWD:$PATH perl -MP -CSA -e "$prog"
perl-5.012005:
["one", "two", "three"]
(had probs building 5.14)
> perl -MP -CSA -e "$prog"
perl-5.016003:
["one", "two", "three"]
(5.18-5.22 not built/tested)
perl-5.24.0/usr/bin> PATH=$PWD:$PATH perl -MP -CSA -e "$prog"
perl-5.024000:
["one", "two", "three"]
/perl-5.26.0/usr/bin> PATH=$PWD:$PATH perl -MP -CSA -e "$prog"
perl-5.026000:
["one", "two", "three"]
(Note: I have 'P' installed from cpan in the versions
tested)
Except for the untested versions, it seems like there is
no ambiguity in "for ($aref) {...}"
Was the problem in one of the untested versions?
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next