Come for the quick hacks, stay for the epiphanies. | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
I still think its the former.
Given that I would assume that writing *%data in any context is equivalent to writing So assuming we can use this as an lvalue, an assignment with a list of pairs to this would be the same as taking each pair and assigning it to the value with the specific key. So *%data = *%values should be compiled as Let me take another example and go back to part(). We could write: So the question here is, is $fish eq "hest" after this, or undef? Alternatly we could have written Would that give the same result? Update: Forgot the multi keyword Update: As broquaint pointed out below, I forgot to use the binding operator as I indented to... Update: And the second example is completly bogus, because it would endeed result in a compile time error. Was
T I M T O W T D I In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Exegesis 6 - Named binding
by Cine
|
|