summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/contrib/perl5/pod/perllol.pod
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'contrib/perl5/pod/perllol.pod')
-rw-r--r--contrib/perl5/pod/perllol.pod303
1 files changed, 303 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/contrib/perl5/pod/perllol.pod b/contrib/perl5/pod/perllol.pod
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..0e6796b50f67
--- /dev/null
+++ b/contrib/perl5/pod/perllol.pod
@@ -0,0 +1,303 @@
+=head1 NAME
+
+perlLoL - Manipulating Lists of Lists in Perl
+
+=head1 DESCRIPTION
+
+=head1 Declaration and Access of Lists of Lists
+
+The simplest thing to build is a list of lists (sometimes called an array
+of arrays). It's reasonably easy to understand, and almost everything
+that applies here will also be applicable later on with the fancier data
+structures.
+
+A list of lists, or an array of an array if you would, is just a regular
+old array @LoL that you can get at with two subscripts, like C<$LoL[3][2]>. Here's
+a declaration of the array:
+
+ # assign to our array a list of list references
+ @LoL = (
+ [ "fred", "barney" ],
+ [ "george", "jane", "elroy" ],
+ [ "homer", "marge", "bart" ],
+ );
+
+ print $LoL[2][2];
+ bart
+
+Now you should be very careful that the outer bracket type
+is a round one, that is, a parenthesis. That's because you're assigning to
+an @list, so you need parentheses. If you wanted there I<not> to be an @LoL,
+but rather just a reference to it, you could do something more like this:
+
+ # assign a reference to list of list references
+ $ref_to_LoL = [
+ [ "fred", "barney", "pebbles", "bambam", "dino", ],
+ [ "homer", "bart", "marge", "maggie", ],
+ [ "george", "jane", "alroy", "judy", ],
+ ];
+
+ print $ref_to_LoL->[2][2];
+
+Notice that the outer bracket type has changed, and so our access syntax
+has also changed. That's because unlike C, in perl you can't freely
+interchange arrays and references thereto. $ref_to_LoL is a reference to an
+array, whereas @LoL is an array proper. Likewise, C<$LoL[2]> is not an
+array, but an array ref. So how come you can write these:
+
+ $LoL[2][2]
+ $ref_to_LoL->[2][2]
+
+instead of having to write these:
+
+ $LoL[2]->[2]
+ $ref_to_LoL->[2]->[2]
+
+Well, that's because the rule is that on adjacent brackets only (whether
+square or curly), you are free to omit the pointer dereferencing arrow.
+But you cannot do so for the very first one if it's a scalar containing
+a reference, which means that $ref_to_LoL always needs it.
+
+=head1 Growing Your Own
+
+That's all well and good for declaration of a fixed data structure,
+but what if you wanted to add new elements on the fly, or build
+it up entirely from scratch?
+
+First, let's look at reading it in from a file. This is something like
+adding a row at a time. We'll assume that there's a flat file in which
+each line is a row and each word an element. If you're trying to develop an
+@LoL list containing all these, here's the right way to do that:
+
+ while (<>) {
+ @tmp = split;
+ push @LoL, [ @tmp ];
+ }
+
+You might also have loaded that from a function:
+
+ for $i ( 1 .. 10 ) {
+ $LoL[$i] = [ somefunc($i) ];
+ }
+
+Or you might have had a temporary variable sitting around with the
+list in it.
+
+ for $i ( 1 .. 10 ) {
+ @tmp = somefunc($i);
+ $LoL[$i] = [ @tmp ];
+ }
+
+It's very important that you make sure to use the C<[]> list reference
+constructor. That's because this will be very wrong:
+
+ $LoL[$i] = @tmp;
+
+You see, assigning a named list like that to a scalar just counts the
+number of elements in @tmp, which probably isn't what you want.
+
+If you are running under C<use strict>, you'll have to add some
+declarations to make it happy:
+
+ use strict;
+ my(@LoL, @tmp);
+ while (<>) {
+ @tmp = split;
+ push @LoL, [ @tmp ];
+ }
+
+Of course, you don't need the temporary array to have a name at all:
+
+ while (<>) {
+ push @LoL, [ split ];
+ }
+
+You also don't have to use push(). You could just make a direct assignment
+if you knew where you wanted to put it:
+
+ my (@LoL, $i, $line);
+ for $i ( 0 .. 10 ) {
+ $line = <>;
+ $LoL[$i] = [ split ' ', $line ];
+ }
+
+or even just
+
+ my (@LoL, $i);
+ for $i ( 0 .. 10 ) {
+ $LoL[$i] = [ split ' ', <> ];
+ }
+
+You should in general be leery of using potential list functions
+in a scalar context without explicitly stating such.
+This would be clearer to the casual reader:
+
+ my (@LoL, $i);
+ for $i ( 0 .. 10 ) {
+ $LoL[$i] = [ split ' ', scalar(<>) ];
+ }
+
+If you wanted to have a $ref_to_LoL variable as a reference to an array,
+you'd have to do something like this:
+
+ while (<>) {
+ push @$ref_to_LoL, [ split ];
+ }
+
+Now you can add new rows. What about adding new columns? If you're
+dealing with just matrices, it's often easiest to use simple assignment:
+
+ for $x (1 .. 10) {
+ for $y (1 .. 10) {
+ $LoL[$x][$y] = func($x, $y);
+ }
+ }
+
+ for $x ( 3, 7, 9 ) {
+ $LoL[$x][20] += func2($x);
+ }
+
+It doesn't matter whether those elements are already
+there or not: it'll gladly create them for you, setting
+intervening elements to C<undef> as need be.
+
+If you wanted just to append to a row, you'd have
+to do something a bit funnier looking:
+
+ # add new columns to an existing row
+ push @{ $LoL[0] }, "wilma", "betty";
+
+Notice that I I<couldn't> say just:
+
+ push $LoL[0], "wilma", "betty"; # WRONG!
+
+In fact, that wouldn't even compile. How come? Because the argument
+to push() must be a real array, not just a reference to such.
+
+=head1 Access and Printing
+
+Now it's time to print your data structure out. How
+are you going to do that? Well, if you want only one
+of the elements, it's trivial:
+
+ print $LoL[0][0];
+
+If you want to print the whole thing, though, you can't
+say
+
+ print @LoL; # WRONG
+
+because you'll get just references listed, and perl will never
+automatically dereference things for you. Instead, you have to
+roll yourself a loop or two. This prints the whole structure,
+using the shell-style for() construct to loop across the outer
+set of subscripts.
+
+ for $aref ( @LoL ) {
+ print "\t [ @$aref ],\n";
+ }
+
+If you wanted to keep track of subscripts, you might do this:
+
+ for $i ( 0 .. $#LoL ) {
+ print "\t elt $i is [ @{$LoL[$i]} ],\n";
+ }
+
+or maybe even this. Notice the inner loop.
+
+ for $i ( 0 .. $#LoL ) {
+ for $j ( 0 .. $#{$LoL[$i]} ) {
+ print "elt $i $j is $LoL[$i][$j]\n";
+ }
+ }
+
+As you can see, it's getting a bit complicated. That's why
+sometimes is easier to take a temporary on your way through:
+
+ for $i ( 0 .. $#LoL ) {
+ $aref = $LoL[$i];
+ for $j ( 0 .. $#{$aref} ) {
+ print "elt $i $j is $LoL[$i][$j]\n";
+ }
+ }
+
+Hmm... that's still a bit ugly. How about this:
+
+ for $i ( 0 .. $#LoL ) {
+ $aref = $LoL[$i];
+ $n = @$aref - 1;
+ for $j ( 0 .. $n ) {
+ print "elt $i $j is $LoL[$i][$j]\n";
+ }
+ }
+
+=head1 Slices
+
+If you want to get at a slice (part of a row) in a multidimensional
+array, you're going to have to do some fancy subscripting. That's
+because while we have a nice synonym for single elements via the
+pointer arrow for dereferencing, no such convenience exists for slices.
+(Remember, of course, that you can always write a loop to do a slice
+operation.)
+
+Here's how to do one operation using a loop. We'll assume an @LoL
+variable as before.
+
+ @part = ();
+ $x = 4;
+ for ($y = 7; $y < 13; $y++) {
+ push @part, $LoL[$x][$y];
+ }
+
+That same loop could be replaced with a slice operation:
+
+ @part = @{ $LoL[4] } [ 7..12 ];
+
+but as you might well imagine, this is pretty rough on the reader.
+
+Ah, but what if you wanted a I<two-dimensional slice>, such as having
+$x run from 4..8 and $y run from 7 to 12? Hmm... here's the simple way:
+
+ @newLoL = ();
+ for ($startx = $x = 4; $x <= 8; $x++) {
+ for ($starty = $y = 7; $y <= 12; $y++) {
+ $newLoL[$x - $startx][$y - $starty] = $LoL[$x][$y];
+ }
+ }
+
+We can reduce some of the looping through slices
+
+ for ($x = 4; $x <= 8; $x++) {
+ push @newLoL, [ @{ $LoL[$x] } [ 7..12 ] ];
+ }
+
+If you were into Schwartzian Transforms, you would probably
+have selected map for that
+
+ @newLoL = map { [ @{ $LoL[$_] } [ 7..12 ] ] } 4 .. 8;
+
+Although if your manager accused of seeking job security (or rapid
+insecurity) through inscrutable code, it would be hard to argue. :-)
+If I were you, I'd put that in a function:
+
+ @newLoL = splice_2D( \@LoL, 4 => 8, 7 => 12 );
+ sub splice_2D {
+ my $lrr = shift; # ref to list of list refs!
+ my ($x_lo, $x_hi,
+ $y_lo, $y_hi) = @_;
+
+ return map {
+ [ @{ $lrr->[$_] } [ $y_lo .. $y_hi ] ]
+ } $x_lo .. $x_hi;
+ }
+
+
+=head1 SEE ALSO
+
+perldata(1), perlref(1), perldsc(1)
+
+=head1 AUTHOR
+
+Tom Christiansen <F<tchrist@perl.com>>
+
+Last update: Thu Jun 4 16:16:23 MDT 1998