array ref notation

fionbarr has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: array ref notation by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Dec 22, 2014 at 21:26 UTC
Is there a practical reason for the 2nd example? Orthogonality. Without the curly braces `@$a[1]` is unintuatively equivalent to `@{$a}[1]`: `$a = [ [1],[2],[3] ];; print @$a[1];; ARRAY(0x1b7ae0) print @{$a}[1];; ARRAY(0x1b7ae0)` [download] Instead of: `print @{ $a[1] };; 2` [download] You can get away with not using the curlies for a single depth dereference, but it is required for greater depths. And this is an error: `print @$a->[1];; Using an array as a reference is deprecated at (eval 15) line 1, <STDI +N> line 7. ARRAY(0x1b7ae0)` [download] That needs to be this: `print @{ $a->[1] };; 2` [download] I find it easier to always use the curlies rather than have to think about the exceptions. With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: array ref notation by LanX (Saint) on Dec 22, 2014 at 21:23 UTC
Some people prefer extra parentheses for clarity or easier extensibility. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)}	[reply]
Re: array ref notation by Anonymous Monk on Dec 22, 2014 at 21:47 UTC
Another way to think about it is that `@$foo` is the shortened version of `@{$foo}`; the latter is needed if the expression gets more complex so you can tell Perl what the order of dereferencing is supposed to be. See Using References	[reply] [d/l] [select]