Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
 
PerlMonks  

Re: SUBSTR OR REGEX: WHICH WILL YOU FAVOUR?

by vsespb (Hermit)
on Oct 26, 2013 at 22:16 UTC ( #1059852=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to SUBSTR OR REGEX: WHICH WILL YOU FAVOUR?

Then, I was told NO, please can you use substr function?
I think that the person who told this was wrong

I don't think it's a case when performance matters. You are working with $ARGV[0], which means it's something done once in the beginning of program

I assume maintainbility and readability is more important here, than tiny performance improvements.
And Perl program written in "C" style (with substr() and index() everywhere) isn't considered readable


Comment on Re: SUBSTR OR REGEX: WHICH WILL YOU FAVOUR?
Re^2: SUBSTR OR REGEX: WHICH WILL YOU FAVOUR?
by BrowserUk (Pope) on Oct 26, 2013 at 22:35 UTC
    And Perl program written in "C" style (with substr() and index() everywhere) isn't considered readable

    Do you perchance mean "isn't considered readable" by YOU?

    Authoritative statements of fact, without citing the source of authority, are like those claims that mobile phones would fry our brain cells.

    It is also a really strange claim. I mean, decently formatted C code is perfectly readable.

    So, decently formatted Perl code written in the C-style can be equally readable.

    It may not be idiomatic; or as concise; or as efficient; but there is no reason it cannot be readable. And if you are unfamiliar with Perl idioms; it is probably far more readable to you than idiomatic Perl.

    BTW: I don't disagree that artificially rejecting the use of regex is a silly restriction -- unless it is done for a reason. Perhaps the idea is to encourage the OP to gain an appreciation of the work that the regex engine does on our behalf.


    With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
      It may not be idiomatic; or as concise; or as efficient; but there is no reason it cannot be readable.

      It's just bigger, more lines of code. More characters in line. More scrolling needed.

      this
      if ($x && $s =~ /(abc|def)/)
      is more readable than this
      if ($x && index($s, "abc") >= 0 || index($s, "def") >= 0)
      It is also a really strange claim. I mean, decently formatted C code is perfectly readable.
      Good C code is readable. But good perl code more readable than good C code.
      Do you perchance mean "isn't considered readable" by YOU?
      Of course. Should I append "IMHO" to every my posting?

      And if you are unfamiliar with Perl idioms; it is probably far more readable to you than idiomatic Perl.
      And if you are familar only with Assembler idioms, Assembler is more readable than Perl, and even more, than C
      without citing the source of authority
      cpan grep for index

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1059852]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others cooling their heels in the Monastery: (9)
As of 2014-09-16 07:43 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    My favorite cookbook is:










    Results (157 votes), past polls