Re^8: Evaluation Order again.

You are probably referring to the argument list expression

That sub only has one argument; the result of evaluating a single expression.

So, no "list" involved, and your argument is pure pedantic fallaciousness.

Pretty much your trademark. Make an unsupportable statement and then defend it to the death by cloaking the issue in a string of non sequiturs.

Comment on Re^8: Evaluation Order again.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: Evaluation Order again. by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jun 02, 2016 at 01:05 UTC
Please ignore the parent post. It's completely wrong. They are lying about me saying there was more than one argument. They are lying when he said it's not an argument list. I got the name from perlsub. I called it the "expression that follows the call" before that. The name isn't even relevant! They are lying about my claim is indefensible. You can run the code yourself to ascertain that the expression that follows the call (which perlsub calls the argument list) isn't always evaluated from left to right.	[reply]
Re^10: Evaluation Order again. by Anonymous Monk on Jun 02, 2016 at 02:25 UTC
{sigh} See what I mean folks. An accusation of lies and a vehement defence of 3 things nobody said. Obfuscation at its most blatant. Nobody said you stated there was more than one argument in your post; but to address the concerns expressed in the post to which you replied; and for you to be able to talk about "argument expression list" (which you did, but you've probably edited that out like always), there would have to be more than one argument. A list of one doesn't address oiskuu's concerns. I didn't say "it's not an argument list". More obfuscation. The indefensible claim comes in a much earlier post; but as always, your memory of your earlier faux pas in defense of your idée fixe are like those of a gold fish; gone in seconds. And it is on that you rely to induce folie à plusieurs amongst your readers. Who could possible care to go back and check the facts.	[reply]