Hello gregory-nisbet,
IIUC, a straightforward way to get the desired behaviour is to change this line:
%$hash_ref or return;
— which, if %$hash_ref is undefined may return either undef or () (the empty list), depending on whether the subroutine is called in scalar or list context — to this:
%$hash_ref or return undef;
BTW, I get the same results with this line:
keys %$hash_ref; # reset iterator
commented-out. Why do you think it’s useful here?
Anyway, hope that helps,
Update 1: It seems I missed the point of your question, which is “What's the idiomatic way to guard against unintentionally expanding a non-singleton list into the bodies of your hashes?” I think your own solution, to “use an intermediate scalar variable” is probably the best way.
Update 2: Alternatively, you could combine your suggestion of using the first element with a test for definedness:
18:30 >perl -MData::Dump -wE "sub f { return (17, 42); } my %h = ( key +1 => (f())[0] // undef ); dd \%h;" { key1 => 17 } 18:30 >perl -MData::Dump -wE "sub f { return (); } my %h = ( key +1 => (f())[0] // undef ); dd \%h;" { key1 => undef } 18:30 >
| Athanasius <°(((>< contra mundum | Iustus alius egestas vitae, eros Piratica, |
In reply to Re: Preventing unintended list expansion inside hash literals.
by Athanasius
in thread Preventing unintended list expansion inside hash literals.
by gregory-nisbet
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |