Re: Tkx after coderef problem

I have also discovered that the following syntax also works.

 
sub accept_out_cclose_after {
  my $tkxfsr=shift;
  my $afterid=shift;  
  my $delay=shift; 
  my $send_id; 
  if ($esub==1)    { $send_id=Tkx::after( $delay , sub{&{$tkxfsr->{aft
+er}{$afterid}{sub}}()});} 
  elsif ($esub==2) { $send_id=Tkx::after( $delay , [$tkxfsr->{after}{$
+afterid}{sub}]        );} 
  else             { $send_id=Tkx::after( $delay ,       $tkxfsr->{aft
+er}{$afterid}{sub}    ); } 
  $tkxfsr->{after}{$afterid}{eventid}=$send_id;
  $tkxfsr->{after}{$afterid}{delay}=$delay;
  }
[download]

perl huh-after.pl -esub 2
[download]

And i suspect that the [] notation in the Tkx::after call is doing the same thing i did with the sub {}, creating a one use anonymous subroutine reference.

Comment on Re: Tkx after coderef problem Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Tkx after coderef problem by Anonymous Monk on Jun 02, 2018 at 20:42 UTC
>>And i suspect that the [] notation in the Tkx::after call is doing the same thing i did with the sub {}, creating a one use anonymous subroutine reference. no it doesnt create an anonymous sub it doesnt need to	[reply]
Re^3: Tkx after coderef problem by huck (Prior) on Jun 03, 2018 at 18:13 UTC
Sorry, yes it does. Found it! https://github.com/gisle/tcl.pm/blob/master/Tcl.pm lines 502-518 elsif ($ref eq 'ARRAY' && ref($arg->[0]) eq 'CODE') { # We have been passed something like [\&subroutine, $arg1, ...] # Create a proc in Tcl that invokes this subroutine with args my $events; # Look for Tcl::Ev objects as the first arg - these must be # passed through for Tcl to evaluate. Used primarily for %-subs # This could check for any arg ref being Tcl::Ev obj, but it # currently doesn't. if ($#$arg >= 1 && ref($arg->[1]) eq 'Tcl::Ev') { $events = splice(@$arg, 1, 1); } $args[$argcnt] = $interp->create_tcl_sub(sub { $arg->[0]->(@_, @$arg[1..$#$arg]); }, $events, undef, $current_r); push @codes, $anon_refs{$current_r}; } [download] Notice how lines 514-516 create a perl anon-sub Sorry, better luck next time!	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: Tkx after coderef problem by huck (Prior) on Jun 02, 2018 at 22:04 UTC
"no it doesnt create an anonymous sub it doesnt need to If you are so sure of that then prove it, show me a link to the arrayref processing of Tkx:after calls, or tell me where to look for the code. Till then my thought that processing of a arrayref in the callback position creates a single use anon-coderef still holds as it explains why that call method works, like the the sub{...} method does, but the static coderef fails. (well at least on unix). There is deep autoload magic going on in Tkx that i still dont understand and i have yet to find out where the parameter munging actually takes place to move across the perl`<->`Tk/Tcl boundary. Ive even tried to look for it.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: Tkx after coderef problem by Anonymous Monk on Jun 03, 2018 at 09:59 UTC
Not going to prove anythung or fix typos. It doesnt need to create a subrkutine to be able to call a subroutine and pass arguments to it.Why would it . calling a subroutine is identical no matter a who creates it.	[reply]