Re^4: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return

Did you, and the one before you, missed the part where I wrote about the case of undef being returned, as in ...

use strict;
my @p = @{ list() };
sub list { return undef; }
[download]

...?

Comment on Re^4: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by Anonymous Monk on Feb 18, 2013 at 00:24 UTC
That is what you said, but look at the OP's code, its always `return \@array` which can never be undef an empty array is better than undef	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by parv (Parson) on Feb 18, 2013 at 00:49 UTC
It seems you and I read the representation of the problem differently. Your reply presumes that every return from sub is always a return of an array reference. (If that promise is made to the user of the sub, then I have no disagreement with direct dereferencing of the return value.) I think of the value returned being an array reference where possible; else, nothing or undef is returned.	[reply]
Re^7: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by Anonymous Monk on Feb 18, 2013 at 01:03 UTC
Look, no temporaries, no fatal :) my @stuff = eval { @{ func() } };	[reply]
Re^8: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by tmharish (Friar) on Feb 18, 2013 at 06:45 UTC
Re^9: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by Arunbear (Prior) on Feb 18, 2013 at 10:53 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^8: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by parv (Parson) on Feb 18, 2013 at 01:05 UTC
Re^8: More efficient dereferencing of a subroutine return by parv (Parson) on Feb 18, 2013 at 01:05 UTC