Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Re (tilly) 3: Dots and cargo-cult programming

by frag (Hermit)
on Jul 15, 2001 at 11:35 UTC ( [id://96835]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re (tilly) 3: Dots and cargo-cult programming
in thread Dots and cargo-cult programming

I'm not sure I follow this. The dot is ugly, but it's not like it inherently discourages you from using it. In fact, it could be said "->" is better for that purpose: more letters to type. (And 3 times more keys!) Plus, you have to use it for objects, unless you want to encourage 'indirect object' syntax.

-- Frag.

  • Comment on Re: Re (tilly) 3: Dots and cargo-cult programming

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re (tilly) 5: Dots and cargo-cult programming
by tilly (Archbishop) on Jul 15, 2001 at 13:02 UTC
    In C accessing a struct directly is done with a ".", but accessing a struct through a reference is done with an "->". So to my eyes the arrow says "indirected through a reference.

    YMMV.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://96835]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others lurking in the Monastery: (3)
As of 2025-05-20 03:21 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?
    erzuuliAnonymous Monks are no longer allowed to use Super Search, due to an excessive use of this resource by robots.