I agree on the fact that a trim function could make sense as an unary operator. I think the problem is mostly that this was not documented, although the code seems to be meant to be shared. Personally though, I prefer only using the special case of the & prototype, where the special block syntax would be invalid without the prototype, removing the need to know how the function was declared to read a statment correctly.
In reply to Re^3: Prototype mismatch: sub main::trim: none vs ($)
by Eily
in thread Prototype mismatch: sub main::trim: none vs ($) at mysqlDB_serial.pl line 188.
by bNathan
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |