Re: [FWP] A major screw-up: infinite loop

["Bernie Cosell" <bernie@fantasyfarm.com>]

On 31 Jul 2000, at 11:21, Kingpin wrote:

> Does the "bug" go away if you use the PROPER elegant
> 
> for my $i (1..$upper)
> 
> instead of that HORRID old C-syntax for-loop?

Elegance is in the eye of the beholder, I guess, but does anyone know any 
benchmarks/rulesofthumb for the relative efficiencies of the two?  I'd 
think that the increment/test version would be faster than the build-a-
huge-list version, at least if you had a lot of values to iterate over.

  /Bernie\
-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--          

==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl?  Well, if you insist...
==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_
====   unsubscribe