I think the gain comes from two things:
- You can take an intermediate form of seq_foreach_from_spec() and pass it around, similar to lexical filehandles. (Remember how cool that was when 5.6 added it?)
- You can extend it a lot more easily than for-loops. In the trivial case, which is what you're describing, it's very easy to see how the for-for version is easier to handle than the FP version. What if you're working 5-10 nested loops? What if you're working a loop with a bunch of double-nested pairs, all of which are similar?
Let's say that you can create an intermediate representation that allows you to pass in N lists and do XYZ to it. What XYZ does is irrelevant, except to say that you need it done to more than one group of lists. Think about it as templates for algorithms and I think you'll see the gain.
Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing.
Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid.
Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence.
Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.