in reply to Re^18: ref to read-only alias ... why? (notabug)
in thread ref to read-only alias ... why?
If it were true, why then threaded and non-threaded perl give different results in \ $_[0] ?
I don't know why that code isn't reached for non-threaded Perls.
Even if it was, that's bad intention to me, and bad design. A bug, basically.
You're wrong to simply declare that it's a design flaw.
Three people in this thread and many of the core Perl5 developers (if not all) know that it's not self-evident that literals should create non-modifiable values.
You're wrong to simply declare that it's a bug.
It's only a bug if it doesn't behave as intended, and some of the core Perl5 developers have explicitly stated they believe literals should return modifiable values.
I was hoping you'd come around to expressing an opinion or making an argument, but all we got were empty declarations.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^20: ref to read-only alias ... why? (notabug)
by dk (Chaplain) on Jan 10, 2012 at 18:33 UTC | |
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jan 12, 2012 at 23:11 UTC | |
by dk (Chaplain) on Jan 18, 2012 at 07:43 UTC | |
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jan 19, 2012 at 01:33 UTC | |
Re^20: ref to read-only alias ... why? (notabug)
by LanX (Saint) on Jan 11, 2012 at 02:10 UTC |