parseperl-discuss

[Parseperl-discuss] How should "for qw<blah> {}" parse?

[Elliot S. <pe...@ga...>]

Currently, it's pretty ugly:

PPI::Document
  PPI::Statement::Compound
    PPI::Token::Word  	'for'
  PPI::Statement
    PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words  	'qw<blah>'
    PPI::Structure::Block  	{ ... }

Should that be

PPI::Document
  PPI::Statement::Compound
    PPI::Token::Word  	'for'
    PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words  	'qw<blah>'
    PPI::Structure::Block  	{ ... }

or

PPI::Document
  PPI::Statement::Compound
    PPI::Token::Word  	'for'
    PPI::Structure::ForLoop  	...
      PPI::Statement
        PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words  	'qw<blah>'
    PPI::Structure::Block  	{ ... }

Re: [Parseperl-discuss] How should "for qw<blah> {}" parse?

[Chris D. <ch...@ch...>]

Elliot,
Are you sure that's valid syntax?  I don't think it's legal to omit  
the parens.

% perl -le'for qw<a b c> { }'
Missing $ on loop variable at -e line 1.

Did you mean "for (qw<a b c>) { }" ?

% ppidump 'for (qw<blah>) { }'
PPI::Document
   PPI::Statement::Compound
     PPI::Token::Word    'for'
     PPI::Structure::ForLoop     ( ... )
       PPI::Statement
         PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words    'qw<blah>'
     PPI::Structure::Block       { ... }

Chris

On Jul 9, 2008, at 6:55 PM, Elliot Shank wrote:

> Currently, it's pretty ugly:
>
> PPI::Document
>   PPI::Statement::Compound
>     PPI::Token::Word  	'for'
>   PPI::Statement
>     PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words  	'qw<blah>'
>     PPI::Structure::Block  	{ ... }
>
> Should that be
>
> PPI::Document
>   PPI::Statement::Compound
>     PPI::Token::Word  	'for'
>     PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words  	'qw<blah>'
>     PPI::Structure::Block  	{ ... }
>
> or
>
> PPI::Document
>   PPI::Statement::Compound
>     PPI::Token::Word  	'for'
>     PPI::Structure::ForLoop  	...
>       PPI::Statement
>         PPI::Token::QuoteLike::Words  	'qw<blah>'
>     PPI::Structure::Block  	{ ... }
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
> ---
> Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW!
> Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project,
> along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness
> and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08
> _______________________________________________
> Parseperl-discuss mailing list
> Par...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/parseperl-discuss

Re: [Parseperl-discuss] How should "for qw<blah> {}" parse?

[Elliot S. <pe...@ga...>]

Chris Dolan wrote:
> Elliot,
> Are you sure that's valid syntax?  I don't think it's legal to omit the 
> parens.

Perfectly valid.

Guy at work was running into a RequireFinalReturn violation because he used that form, even though he had a perfectly good return statement.

Well, not strictly so.  The form in the subject results in a "Missing $ on loop variable".  However, if you declare the loop variable like so:

perl -e 'foreach my $blah qw<blah blah> { print "$blah\n" }'

it works.  No parens anywhere.

Try it.

Re: [Parseperl-discuss] How should "for qw<blah> {}" parse?

[Elliot S. <pe...@ga...>]

I just added a test to t/data/05_lexer/05_compound_loops.code that has it parse the same way as if the qw<> had parentheses around it, except the ForLoop instance doesn't show any parentheses in the dump.  Whether that's the way that Adam thinks that it should look, I leave up to him.