Re^2: Attempting to use $_ in "sub" inside "map"

> is to form a ~~closure~~ | lexical closure (if that's the proper terminology)

I'm pretty sure both are correct. I have trouble to imagine closed over variables which are not lexical. (I usually call those global ;-)

Personally I'd use "lexical closure" to disambiguate, if there is another interpretation of "closure" in the context.

The same way we use "file-glob" and "type-glob" to distinguish between glob and the * sigil

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery}

Comment on Re^2: Attempting to use $_ in "sub" inside "map" Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Attempting to use $_ in "sub" inside "map" by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on May 08, 2021 at 09:47 UTC
I have trouble to imagine closed over variables which are not lexical. Yeah, I was thinking about it after posting and I couldn't come up with an example of non-lexical closure either. I'll just add a link to the Wikipedia article and let everyone else figure it out. :) Give a man a fish: `<%-{-{-{-<`	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Attempting to use $_ in "sub" inside "map" by tobyink (Canon) on May 10, 2021 at 14:30 UTC
In languages without lexically scoped variables or something approximating them, there's not really any such thing as a closure. You can still have first-class functions (i.e. coderefs); they just have no need to close over anything. Hire me at Toby Ink Ltd or Join my OnlyFans	[reply]
Re^4: Attempting to use $_ in "sub" inside "map" by LanX (Saint) on May 10, 2021 at 14:40 UTC
> first-class functions (i.e. coderefs) Doesn't equal closures. OK PHP is using that terminology, but it's wrong ... ... anyway who's using PHP anymore ;-) > In languages without lexically scoped variables or something approximating them do you have an example for such a language with functions as first class objects? Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]