I see these used interchangeably. What's the difference?
+11
A:
I see these used interchangeably.
There is no difference other than that of syntax.
Sarfraz
2010-02-17 09:21:28
+1 Yes, Perl is quite rich in syntactic sugar. There Is More Then One Way to Say It.
Thilo
2010-02-17 09:22:56
@Thilo: agreed :)
Sarfraz
2010-02-17 09:23:50
@Sinan Ünür: Thanks :)
Sarfraz
2010-02-18 04:48:05
+18
A:
There is no difference. From perldoc perlsyn:
The
foreachkeyword is actually a synonym for theforkeyword, so you can useforeachfor readability orforfor brevity.
Hans W
2010-02-17 09:23:37
+5
A:
Four letters.
They're functionally identical, just spelled differently.
Dave Sherohman
2010-02-17 10:16:36
Actually the compile down to the same opcodes. So for all intents and purposes, they are identical.
Brad Gilbert
2010-02-17 14:37:29
+2
A:
Ever since its introduction in perl-2.0, foreach has been synonymous with for. It's a nod to the C shell's foreach command.
In my own code, in the rare case that I'm using a C-style for-loop, I write
for (my $i = 0; $i < $n; ++$i)
but for iterating over an array, I spell out
foreach my $x (@a)
I find that it reads better in my head that way.
Greg Bacon
2010-02-17 15:00:35
I find the opposite: I always use `for my $x (@a)`. I prefer Python's `for x in a` loops, or maybe even PHP's `for(@a as $x)`. I never use C-style `for` loops. I'd write what you have as `for my $i (0 .. $n)`. Perl special-case optimizes that not to create an unnecessary list, so the difference between it and your explicit C-style `for` loop should be negligible, and I think it's more readable that way.
Chris Lutz
2010-02-17 21:54:49
+1
A:
Dear Friend,
In case of the "for" you can use the three steps.
1) Initialization 2) Condition Checking 3) Increment or decrement
But in case of "foreach" you are not able increment or decrement the value. It always take the increment value as 1.
muruga
2010-03-01 11:25:57