Re: Re (tilly) 1: Apocalypse 3

I'm afraid := isn't the fully fledged unification operator you're hoping for. As I'll explain in Exegesis 3, it's really just an aliasing mechanism.

So your declarative emergent $x and $y values aren't actually being declared, or emerging either. :-(

In fact, you'd just get $x aliased to the (constant) result of $y+5 (which will be 5 if there's no prior assignment to $y), and then $y aliased to the (constant) result of $x-3 (which will be 2 under the previous assumption).

However, as a consolation prize for having suggested human sacrifice to me (you did intend it to be a human burnt offering, didn't you???), I have now added a Data::Unification module to my ToDo list. ;-)

Damian

Comment on Re: Re (tilly) 1: Apocalypse 3 Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re (tilly) 1: Apocalypse 3 by $code or die (Deacon) on Oct 06, 2001 at 07:01 UTC
Hi Damian, In the Section "Applied Laziness 101" of the third Exegesis, you wrote: Of course, if we'd written: my ($name, $vers, $status, $costs, @and_the_rest) = <fh>; The the entire file would have been read Did you mean: my ($name, $vers, $status, $costs, *@and_the_rest) = <fh>; or will array assignment work differently on the diamond operator? Simon Flack ($code or die) `$,=reverse'"ro_';s,$,\$,;s,$,lc ref sub{},e;$, =~y'_"' ';eval"die";print $_,lc substr$@,0,3;`	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re (tilly) 1: Apocalypse 3 by TheDamian (Vicar) on Oct 06, 2001 at 10:07 UTC
Did you mean: `my ($name, $vers, $status, $costs, *@and_the_rest) = <fh>;` [download] No. I did mean just what I wrote. Regular `=` assignments have the same "slurp-it-all-up" semantics as in Perl 5. The flattening asterisk is only required in subroutine parameter lists or `:=` bindings.	[reply] [d/l]


Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses
	PerlMonks