Re^4: The purpose of prototypes in perl subroutines

Just because someone says something doesn't make it true. This isn't just semantics, either.

Perhaps you give us the reference where you found Nat talking about this sort of prototype (article name or page number would work). IF you are talking about the "Cryptocontext" article, I think you've misunderstood something.

--
brian d foy <brian@stonehenge.com>

Comment on Re^4: The purpose of prototypes in perl subroutines

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: The purpose of prototypes in perl subroutines by jjhorner (Hermit) on Apr 13, 2005 at 17:41 UTC
Okay, Page 20, "Computer Science & Perl Programming", edited by Jon Orwant, Chapter 3, article title is Perfect Programming. I'm not making this up: Quote: When it's in effect, you can't use the bareword style of calling subroutines with no arguments (e.g. $result = mysub;) unless the subroutine was declared before its use, either with a prototype or with the subroutine definition itself. EndQuote: `use strict 'subs'; print count; # an error with use strict 'subs' sub count; # prototyping count() is sufficient print count; # Not an error because Perl now knows about count()` [download] J. J. Horner CISSP,CCNA,CHSS,CHP,blah,blah,blah	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: The purpose of prototypes in perl subroutines by brian_d_foy (Abbot) on Apr 13, 2005 at 18:12 UTC
The part that you called "prototyping" before is just the subroutine's forward definition. He gives two things there that get around 'use strict', and the one you used wasn't the one with prototypes. The very first example in perlsub tells you which one you used: `To declare subroutines: sub NAME; # A "forward" declaration. sub NAME(PROTO); # ditto, but with prototypes` [download] -- brian d foy <brian@stonehenge.com>	[reply] [d/l]


P is for Practical
	PerlMonks