any(@a) eq $x
is just not as comprehensible as $x in @a
, even if it does the same thing.]]>
$x in @avery comprehensible because it isn't obvious how it will be comparing elements. Will it use string equality or numeric equality? What if you need to pick one or the other?]]>
The new subs in List::Util are OK but they (understandably) follow the syntax of the rest, which is less sugary. This seemed to be an important point in the OP. How much sugar you like is a matter of taste, of course.
I agree with Graham Knop and I consider any(@a) eq $x
better because I can also say any(@a) == $x
and any(@a) =~ $x
, which is needed in Perl5 to avoid all smart match hoop jumping. Sometimes DWIM just expands to Detail What It Means.
$x in @m
and $y ~> @n
are analogous to and just as comprehensible as $x eq $m
and $y == $n
.]]>
Dist::Zilla::Plugin::Test::Compile - Common tests to check syntax of your modules, using only core modules
]]>'eats shoots leaves'
situation. Will correct the post
thanks
https://blogs.perl.org/users/byterock/2017/11/and-here-we-go.html
]]>I suppose I could use SQL::Abstract to generate the SQL I would have to white some sort of transmogifier code to go from the Database::Accessor abstration to the SQL::Abstract version.
Just as much code me thinks.
Better is increased smarts in the link-in-sentence parsing of the platform you are writing on. It will be hard to get it perfect, but noting that very few URL's end with a period might lend a content parser to break before a period by default, resorting to methods like quoting (by the author) as a last resort.
It is certainly better to implement this in the machine instead of expecting a reader to notice it, as 1) this reader didn't notice the period until it was brought to her attention, and 2) the first thing many readers will try upon wanting to follow a link is to click on it. Hopefully that will work, otherwise they might never get to the URL intended (yes, I am distractible, and I never did make it to that URL).
Comment Submission Error
Your comment submission failed for the following reaons:
Your session has expired. Please sign in again to comment.
Return to the _original entry_.
I thought, huh? Tried to hit BACK and got:
This document is no longer available (OK)
Then I tried the link "_original entry_".
Gave me the same error.
Fortunately my browser has an added extension
"TextArea Cache", which allows me to recover almost any text on any window that's been timed out or prematurely closed. Maybe the timeout on the submission is a bit tight?
Update -- did it again, problem is, it doesn't seem to like one previewing it (*sigh*)
]]>