Brad

• About: I blog about PERLH^H^H^erl

Recent Actions

• Commented on I want Package BLOCK syntax return 1.
  https://metacpan.org/pod/true...
• Commented on A simple perl recursion example
  Very cool. But what if your perl is in a different path? :-o print "lel.\n"; system $^X . " $0"; Should take care of it for you....
• Commented on Proposal: elseif be an alias for elsif (as in foreach and for)
  Looks like Perl at least knows about it.. I get this elseif should be elsif at - line 2....
• Commented on Proposal: elseif be an alias for elsif (as in foreach and for)
  I was lucky(?) enough to start programming with Ruby, so the switch to "elsif" with Perl wasn't really an issue. "elseif" is very PHP-esque.. so I'm going to say no thank you to this one. However, I wouldn't mind "else...

Comment Threads

• gautam.dey77 commented on A simple perl recursion example

  So, you solution would eventually run out of memory; or would hit the limit of number of processes your os will allow. If you really want it to be infinite; you should use exec; which would basically be doing a tail call optimization. (Since nothing after the exec will get called; and the process memory space is reused.)

  


  
  
  #!/usr/bin/perl 

  use v5.12.0;
  use warnings;

  say 'foo:'.($ARGV[0] // 'none');
  exec join(' ' ,$^X, $0 , $ARGV[0]+1) ;
  
  
  

• fluca1978 commented on I want Package BLOCK syntax return 1.

  I guess you assume that every package is going into a separate file, and therefore a module to load. But if you define several packages into the same file unit, you are going to require Perl to conclude each block with useless return statements. While I cannot see a problem with that (from a practical point of view), I don't see a reason for having it too.

• Yuki Kimoto commented on I want Package BLOCK syntax return 1.

  Brad

  true is very interesting.

• Yuki Kimoto commented on I want Package BLOCK syntax return 1.

  fluca1978

  >I guess you assume that every package is going into a separate file.

  No, package Foo { ...; 1;} package Bar { ...; 1;} have no problem.

  >While I cannot see a problem with that (from a practical point of view), I don't see a reason for having it too.

  My point is that 1; is strange specification and people tend to forget to write 1;. so I want to hide this strange specification in some way.
  

• Yuki Kimoto commented on I want Package BLOCK syntax return 1.

  Brad

  I use true module in mop::minus. This seem to be good.
  https://github.com/yuki-kimoto/mop-minus-proposal