I am new to Perl.
How do I interpret this Perl statement?:
my( $foo, $bar ) = split /\s+/, $foobar, 2;
I know that local variables are being simultaneously assigned by the split function, but I don't understand what the integer 2 is for - I'm guessing the func will return an array with two elements?.
Can a Perl monger explain the statement above to me (ELI5)
Also, on occasion, the string being split does not contain the expected tokens, resulting in either foo or bar being uninitialized and thus causing a warning when an attempt is made to use them further on in the code.
How do I initialize $foo and $bar to sensible values (null strings) in case the split "fails" to return two strings?
The split function takes three arguments:
A regex that matches separators, or the special value " " (a string consisting of a single space), which trims the string, then splits at whitespace like /\s+/.
A string that shall be split.
A maximum number of resulting fragments. Sometimes this is an optimization when you aren't interested in all fields, and sometimes you don't want to split at each separator, as is the case here.
So your split expression will return at most two fields, but not neccessarily exactly two. To give your variables default values, either assign default values before the split, or check if they are undef after the split, and give the default:
my ($foo, $bar) = ('', '');
($foo, $bar) = split ...;
or combined
(my ($foo, $bar) = ('', '')) = split ...
or
my ($foo, $bar) = split ...;
$_ //= '' for $foo, $bar;
The //= operator assigns the value on the RHS if the LHS is undef. The for loop is just a way to shorten the code.
You may also want to carry on with a piece of code only when exactly two fields were produced:
if ( 2 == (my ($foo, $bar) = split ...) ) {
say "foo = $foo";
say "bar = $bar";
} else {
warn "could not split!";
}
List assignment in scalar context evaluates to the number of elements assigned.
The 2 is the maximum number of components returned by split.
Thus, the regexp /\s+/ splits $foobar on clumps of whitespace, but will only split once, to make two components. If there is no whitespace, then $bar will be undefined.
See http://perldoc.perl.org/functions/split.html
In addition to amon's method, Perl has a defined(x) function that returns true or false depending on whether its argument x is defined or undefined, and this can be used in an if statement to correct cases where something is undefined.
See http://perldoc.perl.org/functions/defined.html
As stated here: http://perldoc.perl.org/functions/split.html
"If LIMIT is specified and positive, it represents the maximum number of fields into which the EXPR may be split;"
For example:
#!/opt/local/bin/perl
my $foobar = "A B C D";
my( $foo, $bar ) = split /\s+/, $foobar, 2;
print "\nfoo=$foo";
print "\nbar=$bar";
print "\n";
output:
foo=A
bar=B C D
Related
I have multiple variables that have strings in the following format:
some_text_here__what__i__want_here__andthen_some
I want to be able to assign to a variable the what__i__want_here portion of the first variable. In other words, everything after the FIRST double underscore. There may be double underscores in the rest of the string but I only want to take the text after the FIRST pair of underscores.
Ex.
If I have $var = "some_text_here__what__i__want_here__andthen_some", I would like to assign to a new variable only the second part like $var2 = "what__i__want_here__andthen_some"
I'm not very good at matching so I'm not quite sure how to do it so it just takes everything after the first double underscore.
my $text = 'some_text_here__what__i__want_here';
# .*? # Match a minimal number of characters - see "man perlre"
# /s # Make . match also newline - see "man perlre"
my ($var) = $text =~ /^.*?__(.*)$/s;
# $var is not defined when there is no __ in the string
print "var=${var}\n" if defined($var);
You might consider this an example of where split's third parameter is useful. The third parameter to split constrains how many elements to return. Here is an example:
my #examples = (
'some_text_here__what__i_want_here',
'__keep_this__part',
'nothing_found_here',
'nothing_after__',
);
foreach my $string (#examples) {
my $want = (split /__/, $string, 2)[1];
print "$string => ", (defined $want ? $want : ''), "\n";
}
The output will look like this:
some_text_here__what__i_want_here => what__i_want_here
__keep_this__part => keep_this__part
nothing_found_here =>
nothing_after__ =>
This line is a little dense:
my $want = (split /__/, $string, 2)[1];
Let's break that down:
my ($prefix, $want) = split /__/, $string, 2;
The 2 parameter tells split that no matter how many times the pattern /__/ could match, we only want to split one time, the first time it's found. So as another example:
my (#parts) = split /#/, "foo#bar#baz#buzz", 3;
The #parts array will receive these elements: 'foo', 'bar', 'baz#buzz', because we told it to stop splitting after the second split, so that we get a total maximum of three elements in our result.
Back to your case, we set 2 as the maximum number of elements. We then go one step further by eliminating the need for my ($throwaway, $want) = .... We can tell Perl we only care about the second element in the list of things returned by split, by providing an index.
my $want = ('a', 'b', 'c', 'd')[2]; # c, the element at offset 2 in the list.
my $want = (split /__/, $string, 2)[1]; # The element at offset 1 in the list
# of two elements returned by split.
You use brackets to capature then reorder the string, the first set of brackets () is $1 in the next part of the substitution, etc ...
my $string = "some_text_here__what__i__want_here";
(my $newstring = $string) =~ s/(some_text_here)(__)(what__i__want_here)/$3$2$1/;
print $newstring;
OUTPUT
what__i__want_here__some_text_here
I dont understand how the "my" keyword works here. This is my perl script.
$line = ' sdfaad(asdvfr)';
code1:
if ($tmp = $line =~ /(\(\s*[^)]+\))/ ) {
print $tmp;
}
Outputs:
1
code2:
if (my ($tmp) = $line =~ /(\(\s*[^)]+\))/ ) {
print $tmp;
}
Outputs:
(asdvfr)
Why are the two outputs different? Does it have to do with the use of my?
It is not my that makes the difference, but scalar/list context. Braces around $tmp are imposing list context,
if (($tmp) = $line=~ /(\(\s*[^)]+\))/ ) # braces makes difference, not 'my'
while my only declares variable as lexical scoped one.
Perl has two different assignment operators; a list assignment operator and a scalar assignment operator. A list assignment gives its right operand list context, while a scalar assignment gives its right operand scalar context. A match operation returns differently depending on this context.
Which operator = is depends on what is on the left side; if it is an array, a hash, a slice, or a parenthesized expression, it is a list assignment; otherwise it is a scalar assignment.
So I have this bit of code that does not work:
print $userInput."\n" x $userInput2; #$userInput = string & $userInput2 is a integer
It prints it out once fine if the number is over 0 of course, but it doesn't print out the rest if the number is greater than 1. I come from a java background and I assume that it does the concatenation first, then the result will be what will multiply itself with the x operator. But of course that does not happen. Now it works when I do the following:
$userInput .= "\n";
print $userInput x $userInput2;
I am new to Perl so I'd like to understand exactly what goes on with chaining, and if I can even do so.
You're asking about operator precedence. ("Chaining" usually refers to chaining of method calls, e.g. $obj->foo->bar->baz.)
The Perl documentation page perlop starts off with a list of all the operators in order of precedence level. x has the same precedence as other multiplication operators, and . has the same precedence as other addition operators, so of course x is evaluated first. (i.e., it "has higher precedence" or "binds more tightly".)
As in Java you can resolve this with parentheses:
print(($userInput . "\n") x $userInput2);
Note that you need two pairs of parentheses here. If you'd only used the inner parentheses, Perl would treat them as indicating the arguments to print, like this:
# THIS DOESN'T WORK
print($userInput . "\n") x $userInput2;
This would print the string once, then duplicate print's return value some number of times. Putting space before the ( doesn't help since whitespace is generally optional and ignored. In a way, this is another form of operator precedence: function calls bind more tightly than anything else.
If you really hate having more parentheses than strictly necessary, you can defeat Perl with the unary + operator:
print +($userInput . "\n") x $userInput2;
This separates the print from the (, so Perl knows the rest of the line is a single expression. Unary + has no effect whatsoever; its primary use is exactly this sort of situation.
This is due to precedence of . (concatenation) operator being less than the x operator. So it ends up with:
use strict;
use warnings;
my $userInput = "line";
my $userInput2 = 2;
print $userInput.("\n" x $userInput2);
And outputs:
line[newline]
[newline]
This is what you want:
print (($userInput."\n") x $userInput2);
This prints out:
line
line
As has already been mentioned, this is a precedence issue, in that the repetition operator x has higher precedence than the concatenation operator .. However, that is not all that's going on here, and also, the issue itself comes from a bad solution.
First off, when you say
print (($foo . "\n") x $count);
What you are doing is changing the context of the repetition operator to list context.
(LIST) x $count
The above statement really means this (if $count == 3):
print ( $foo . "\n", $foo . "\n", $foo . "\n" ); # list with 3 elements
From perldoc perlop:
Binary "x" is the repetition operator. In scalar context or if the left operand is not enclosed in parentheses, it returns a string consisting of the left operand repeated the number of times specified by the right operand. In list context, if the left operand is enclosed in parentheses or is a list formed by qw/STRING/, it repeats the list. If the right operand is zero or negative, it returns an empty string or an empty list, depending on the context.
The solution works as intended because print takes list arguments. However, if you had something else that takes scalar arguments, such as a subroutine:
foo(("text" . "\n") x 3);
sub foo {
# #_ is now the list ("text\n", "text\n", "text\n");
my ($string) = #_; # error enters here
# $string is now "text\n"
}
This is a subtle difference which might not always give the desired result.
A better solution for this particular case is to not use the concatenation operator at all, because it is redundant:
print "$foo\n" x $count;
Or even use more mundane methods:
for (0 .. $count) {
print "$foo\n";
}
Or
use feature 'say'
...
say $foo for 0 .. $count;
I am currently documenting all of Perl 5's operators (see the perlopref GitHub project) and I have decided to include Perl 5's pseudo-operators as well. To me, a pseudo-operator in Perl is anything that looks like an operator, but is really more than one operator or a some other piece of syntax. I have documented the four I am familiar with already:
()= the countof operator
=()= the goatse/countof operator
~~ the scalar context operator
}{ the Eskimo-kiss operator
What other names exist for these pseudo-operators, and do you know of any pseudo-operators I have missed?
=head1 Pseudo-operators
There are idioms in Perl 5 that appear to be operators, but are really a
combination of several operators or pieces of syntax. These pseudo-operators
have the precedence of the constituent parts.
=head2 ()= X
=head3 Description
This pseudo-operator is the list assignment operator (aka the countof
operator). It is made up of two items C<()>, and C<=>. In scalar context
it returns the number of items in the list X. In list context it returns an
empty list. It is useful when you have something that returns a list and
you want to know the number of items in that list and don't care about the
list's contents. It is needed because the comma operator returns the last
item in the sequence rather than the number of items in the sequence when it
is placed in scalar context.
It works because the assignment operator returns the number of items
available to be assigned when its left hand side has list context. In the
following example there are five values in the list being assigned to the
list C<($x, $y, $z)>, so C<$count> is assigned C<5>.
my $count = my ($x, $y, $z) = qw/a b c d e/;
The empty list (the C<()> part of the pseudo-operator) triggers this
behavior.
=head3 Example
sub f { return qw/a b c d e/ }
my $count = ()= f(); #$count is now 5
my $string = "cat cat dog cat";
my $cats = ()= $string =~ /cat/g; #$cats is now 3
print scalar( ()= f() ), "\n"; #prints "5\n"
=head3 See also
L</X = Y> and L</X =()= Y>
=head2 X =()= Y
This pseudo-operator is often called the goatse operator for reasons better
left unexamined; it is also called the list assignment or countof operator.
It is made up of three items C<=>, C<()>, and C<=>. When X is a scalar
variable, the number of items in the list Y is returned. If X is an array
or a hash it it returns an empty list. It is useful when you have something
that returns a list and you want to know the number of items in that list
and don't care about the list's contents. It is needed because the comma
operator returns the last item in the sequence rather than the number of
items in the sequence when it is placed in scalar context.
It works because the assignment operator returns the number of items
available to be assigned when its left hand side has list context. In the
following example there are five values in the list being assigned to the
list C<($x, $y, $z)>, so C<$count> is assigned C<5>.
my $count = my ($x, $y, $z) = qw/a b c d e/;
The empty list (the C<()> part of the pseudo-operator) triggers this
behavior.
=head3 Example
sub f { return qw/a b c d e/ }
my $count =()= f(); #$count is now 5
my $string = "cat cat dog cat";
my $cats =()= $string =~ /cat/g; #$cats is now 3
=head3 See also
L</=> and L</()=>
=head2 ~~X
=head3 Description
This pseudo-operator is named the scalar context operator. It is made up of
two bitwise negation operators. It provides scalar context to the
expression X. It works because the first bitwise negation operator provides
scalar context to X and performs a bitwise negation of the result; since the
result of two bitwise negations is the original item, the value of the
original expression is preserved.
With the addition of the Smart match operator, this pseudo-operator is even
more confusing. The C<scalar> function is much easier to understand and you
are encouraged to use it instead.
=head3 Example
my #a = qw/a b c d/;
print ~~#a, "\n"; #prints 4
=head3 See also
L</~X>, L</X ~~ Y>, and L<perlfunc/scalar>
=head2 X }{ Y
=head3 Description
This pseudo-operator is called the Eskimo-kiss operator because it looks
like two faces touching noses. It is made up of an closing brace and an
opening brace. It is used when using C<perl> as a command-line program with
the C<-n> or C<-p> options. It has the effect of running X inside of the
loop created by C<-n> or C<-p> and running Y at the end of the program. It
works because the closing brace closes the loop created by C<-n> or C<-p>
and the opening brace creates a new bare block that is closed by the loop's
original ending. You can see this behavior by using the L<B::Deparse>
module. Here is the command C<perl -ne 'print $_;'> deparsed:
LINE: while (defined($_ = <ARGV>)) {
print $_;
}
Notice how the original code was wrapped with the C<while> loop. Here is
the deparsing of C<perl -ne '$count++ if /foo/; }{ print "$count\n"'>:
LINE: while (defined($_ = <ARGV>)) {
++$count if /foo/;
}
{
print "$count\n";
}
Notice how the C<while> loop is closed by the closing brace we added and the
opening brace starts a new bare block that is closed by the closing brace
that was originally intended to close the C<while> loop.
=head3 Example
# count unique lines in the file FOO
perl -nle '$seen{$_}++ }{ print "$_ => $seen{$_}" for keys %seen' FOO
# sum all of the lines until the user types control-d
perl -nle '$sum += $_ }{ print $sum'
=head3 See also
L<perlrun> and L<perlsyn>
=cut
Nice project, here are a few:
scalar x!! $value # conditional scalar include operator
(list) x!! $value # conditional list include operator
'string' x/pattern/ # conditional include if pattern
"#{[ list ]}" # interpolate list expression operator
"${\scalar}" # interpolate scalar expression operator
!! $scalar # scalar -> boolean operator
+0 # cast to numeric operator
.'' # cast to string operator
{ ($value or next)->depends_on_value() } # early bail out operator
# aka using next/last/redo with bare blocks to avoid duplicate variable lookups
# might be a stretch to call this an operator though...
sub{\#_}->( list ) # list capture "operator", like [ list ] but with aliases
In Perl these are generally referred to as "secret operators".
A partial list of "secret operators" can be had here. The best and most complete list is probably in possession of Philippe Bruhad aka BooK and his Secret Perl Operators talk but I don't know where its available. You might ask him. You can probably glean some more from Obfuscation, Golf and Secret Operators.
Don't forget the Flaming X-Wing =<>=~.
The Fun With Perl mailing list will prove useful for your research.
The "goes to" and "is approached by" operators:
$x = 10;
say $x while $x --> 4;
# prints 9 through 4
$x = 10;
say $x while 4 <-- $x;
# prints 9 through 5
They're not unique to Perl.
From this question, I discovered the %{{}} operator to cast a list as a hash. Useful in
contexts where a hash argument (and not a hash assignment) are required.
#list = (a,1,b,2);
print values #list; # arg 1 to values must be hash (not array dereference)
print values %{#list} # prints nothing
print values (%temp=#list) # arg 1 to values must be hash (not list assignment)
print values %{{#list}} # success: prints 12
If #list does not contain any duplicate keys (odd-elements), this operator also provides a way to access the odd or even elements of a list:
#even_elements = keys %{{#list}} # #list[0,2,4,...]
#odd_elements = values %{{#list}} # #list[1,3,5,...]
The Perl secret operators now have some reference (almost official, but they are "secret") documentation on CPAN: perlsecret
You have two "countof" (pseudo-)operators, and I don't really see the difference between them.
From the examples of "the countof operator":
my $count = ()= f(); #$count is now 5
my $string = "cat cat dog cat";
my $cats = ()= $string =~ /cat/g; #$cats is now 3
From the examples of "the goatse/countof operator":
my $count =()= f(); #$count is now 5
my $string = "cat cat dog cat";
my $cats =()= $string =~ /cat/g; #$cats is now 3
Both sets of examples are identical, modulo whitespace. What is your reasoning for considering them to be two distinct pseudo-operators?
How about the "Boolean one-or-zero" operator: 1&!!
For example:
my %result_of = (
" 1&!! '0 but true' " => 1&!! '0 but true',
" 1&!! '0' " => 1&!! '0',
" 1&!! 'text' " => 1&!! 'text',
" 1&!! 0 " => 1&!! 0,
" 1&!! 1 " => 1&!! 1,
" 1&!! undef " => 1&!! undef,
);
for my $expression ( sort keys %result_of){
print "$expression = " . $result_of{$expression} . "\n";
}
gives the following output:
1&!! '0 but true' = 1
1&!! '0' = 0
1&!! 'text' = 1
1&!! 0 = 0
1&!! 1 = 1
1&!! undef = 0
The << >> operator, for multi-line comments:
<<q==q>>;
This is a
multiline
comment
q
What is the difference between the scalar and list contexts in Perl and does this have any parallel in other languages such as Java or Javascript?
Various operators in Perl are context sensitive and produce different results in list and scalar context.
For example:
my(#array) = (1, 2, 4, 8, 16);
my($first) = #array;
my(#copy1) = #array;
my #copy2 = #array;
my $count = #array;
print "array: #array\n";
print "first: $first\n";
print "copy1: #copy1\n";
print "copy2: #copy2\n";
print "count: $count\n";
Output:
array: 1 2 4 8 16
first: 1
copy1: 1 2 4 8 16
copy2: 1 2 4 8 16
count: 5
Now:
$first contains 1 (the first element of the array), because the parentheses in the my($first) provide an array context, but there's only space for one value in $first.
both #copy1 and #copy2 contain a copy of #array,
and $count contains 5 because it is a scalar context, and #array evaluates to the number of elements in the array in a scalar context.
More elaborate examples could be constructed too (the results are an exercise for the reader):
my($item1, $item2, #rest) = #array;
my(#copy3, #copy4) = #array, #array;
There is no direct parallel to list and scalar context in other languages that I know of.
Scalar context is what you get when you're looking for a single value. List context is what you get when you're looking for multiple values. One of the most common places to see the distinction is when working with arrays:
#x = #array; # copy an array
$x = #array; # get the number of elements in an array
Other operators and functions are context sensitive as well:
$x = 'abc' =~ /(\w+)/; # $x = 1
($x) = 'abc' =~ /(\w+)/; # $x = 'abc'
#x = localtime(); # (seconds, minutes, hours...)
$x = localtime(); # 'Thu Dec 18 10:02:17 2008'
How an operator (or function) behaves in a given context is up to the operator. There are no general rules for how things are supposed to behave.
You can make your own subroutines context sensitive by using the wantarray function to determine the calling context. You can force an expression to be evaluated in scalar context by using the scalar keyword.
In addition to scalar and list contexts you'll also see "void" (no return value expected) and "boolean" (a true/false value expected) contexts mentioned in the documentation.
This simply means that a data-type will be evaluated based on the mode of the operation. For example, an assignment to a scalar means the right-side will be evaluated as a scalar.
I think the best means of understanding context is learning about wantarray. So imagine that = is a subroutine that implements wantarray:
sub = {
return if ( ! defined wantarray ); # void: just return (doesn't make sense for =)
return #_ if ( wantarray ); # list: return the array
return $#_ + 1; # scalar: return the count of the #_
}
The examples in this post work as if the above subroutine is called by passing the right-side as the parameter.
As for parallels in other languages, yes, I still maintain that virtually every language supports something similar. Polymorphism is similar in all OO languages. Another example, Java converts objects to String in certain contexts. And every untyped scripting language i've used has similar concepts.