Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 5 Apr 2010 17:36:32 +0100
From:      RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: perl qstn...
Message-ID:  <20100405173632.739a0c42@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BB9A5ED.3040309@infracaninophile.co.uk>
References:  <20100403210610.GA4135@thought.org> <4BB8108A.9080104@FreeBSD.org> <1270371713.5861.98.camel@tao.thought.org> <86aatjnsts.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <861vevnsow.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <j2ya14066a01004040945z39191770k2f025752317fb14a@mail.gmail.com> <20100404163353.GA15198@guilt.hydra> <20100404201442.b456044e.freebsd@edvax.de> <o2oa14066a01004041148zd4ef8167q32b04d58daec8f9f@mail.gmail.com> <4BB9A5ED.3040309@infracaninophile.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:57:17 +0100
Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 

> I've always found that 'unless' makes a great deal of sense when used
> in the alternate syntax:
> 
> do_foo()
>     unless $condition ;
> 
> As far as I know, perl and its descendant ruby are the only
> programming languages that let you put the condition test after the
> action, 

IMO this is a bad mistake that other languages were quite right not to
copy - a test shouldn't come after a block of code unless it's evaluated
after the block (as in repeat...until) 




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20100405173632.739a0c42>