Re^5: If you believe in Lists in Scalar Context, Clap your Hands

Wrong. Don't forget that plain = is the scalar assignment operator, unless there is a hash or array on the left. ()= is the list assignment operator:

$ perl
use strict;
use warnings;
my ($i,$j);
sub f :lvalue { ($i,$j) }
(f()) = (4,5);
print("$i,$j\n");
__END__
4,5
[download]

However, I would be very leery of using a relatively new feature like that that has probably not been used much in that way.

Comment on Re^5: If you believe in Lists in Scalar Context, Clap your Hands Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: If you believe in Lists in Scalar Context, Clap your Hands by ikegami (Patriarch) on Oct 28, 2008 at 10:21 UTC
Ah thanks, (although, not just "`()=`" is the list assignment operator). I would be very leery of using lvalue subs in any way.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: If you believe in Lists in Scalar Context, Clap your Hands by JavaFan (Canon) on Oct 28, 2008 at 11:05 UTC
Which relative new feature are you refering to? lvalue subs have been around since at least 5.6.0, and maybe even before that.	[reply]
Re^7: If you believe in Lists in Scalar Context, Clap your Hands by ysth (Canon) on Oct 28, 2008 at 18:34 UTC
The "relatively" new feature I meant is lvalue subs, yes. I wasn't saying not to use them at all; the "like that" meant to avoid using them in uncommon ways. Or do thorough testing on all perl versions you expect to use. Since I don't know of a specific problem, this counts as FUD, but I am unrepentant. -- Online Fortune Cookie Search Office Space merchandise	[reply]


Syntactic Confectionery Delight
	PerlMonks