From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 5 16:36:37 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFDE0106564A for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 16:36:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wy0-f182.google.com (mail-wy0-f182.google.com [74.125.82.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CDE78FC14 for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 16:36:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyb33 with SMTP id 33so1722490wyb.13 for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:36:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xa2vJOufDoYXKMo1PVVmfuRr7oC1y5DUxsxrgJmreNk=; b=clR27jflEU5czC3CejZPLYhBFdQndsEuWlCoIodY5SlwRMQBS21Gc6LkbaOWAR77r8 MXCdzSF/stEJm7c1HjUSO3+y25Vo5v5z23Dqo1ZRXxgYSZURtL2lKeku040Xh7s2IjcG 0YKAMLIfIHrIogVW9l/o9sXxaZRoeZ9yLDN1I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=tgHBHMhz/h1Grpm0LbMak6Q0235b6HqIxLdomewjlauMBRBnBFgj8Dd+W4ZkbaN7ZP OVAiZIuC4lDwBWyf8eQFXl8eOTBDlWirYWrO93VBapXV1T6o5cq1qoqqPnFx8eNYKG6z PEilRo4Q5dDxrplDOn1dyxBegNjjBR/xNrmX8= Received: by 10.216.90.145 with SMTP id e17mr3521332wef.106.1270485396242; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:36:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.140.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x6sm25293461gvf.27.2010.04.05.09.36.35 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 17:36:32 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org 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> <20100404163353.GA15198@guilt.hydra> <20100404201442.b456044e.freebsd@edvax.de> <4BB9A5ED.3040309@infracaninophile.co.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.5 (GTK+ 2.18.7; i386-portbld-freebsd8.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: perl qstn... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:36:37 -0000 On Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:57:17 +0100 Matthew Seaman 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)