Re: Re: Method Calls on multiple objects

Or even capturing return values:

my @rets = map { $_->$method( @args ) } @objs;
[download]

Or allowing returns of lists:

my @rets = map { [ $_->$method( @args ) ] } @objs;
[download]

Comment on Re: Re: Method Calls on multiple objects Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: Method Calls on multiple objects by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Mar 27, 2004 at 03:31 UTC
So, why would an aggregate be better? What syntactic sugar are you looking for? ------ We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age. Then there are Damian modules.... sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon.* - flyingmoose	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Method Calls on multiple objects by flyingmoose (Priest) on Mar 27, 2004 at 19:29 UTC
What syntactic sugar are you looking for? He was arguing (as I was) against your post that there never comes a need to call a method against a collection of objects. It was you who were were saying the demand for an aggregate was a red-flag in a code-review, and then you complain our percieved advocacy of aggregates, neither of which we have posted. Both fletch and I have mentioned foreach, map, grep, and so on -- not aggregates. Please reread our posts, as I think you are confusing our posts with those of Limbic~Region, who created a very special-case agg. (not just 'RandomSpaceTravelers' (which is a fair collection class if you really need one) but a much different (and bizarre) function calling interface for a list of random space travellers). We aren't the same people, and we aren't making the same points.	[reply]


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks