Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight

Re^3: A better (ie.more concise) way to write this?

by Laurent_R (Abbot)
on Dec 13, 2013 at 18:55 UTC ( #1067054=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: A better (ie.more concise) way to write this?
in thread A better (ie.more concise) way to write this?

Then , if you want to modify an existing data structure, what about using the fact that modifying $_ will modify the original array? Something like this, shown under the debugger:
DB<1> @a = 1..9; DB<2> map{ $_ = ++$_% 10 } @a; DB<3> x @a 0 2 1 3 2 4 3 5 4 6 5 7 6 8 7 9 8 0 DB<4>
Well, this obviously works, but something like $c = ++$c is, I believe, not defined in C and probably also not in Perl (i.e. the implementor if free to do whatever). It could be changed to:
map { $_ ++; $_ = $_ % 10} @a;
This would probably be more secure against any change of implementation.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1067054]
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others musing on the Monastery: (5)
As of 2016-10-26 05:34 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How many different varieties (color, size, etc) of socks do you have in your sock drawer?

    Results (335 votes). Check out past polls.