Dear monks,
My faith in -MO=Deparse, a tool I've counted on for so long, has been severely tested recently. A few days ago ikegami pointed out errors in output from -MO=Deparse. Today I found what appears like another -MO=Deparse goof. Here's the original snippet and its output:
Here is -MO=Deparse's rendition of same:% perl -le '$_ = ($x) = (4, 5, 6); print' 3
And, finally, here is the execution of -MO=Deparse's rendition:% perl -MO=Deparse,-p -le '$_ = ($x) = (4, 5, 6); print' ($_ = ($x = (4, 5, 6))); print($_); -e syntax OK
I've stared at this till my eyes hurt, so I think it's time to let fresh eyes look at it at tell me what I'm missing. ('Cause I sure hope it's me and not -MO=Deparse that is wrong here).% perl -le '($_ = ($x = (4, 5, 6))); print($_)' 6
Thanks for your help.
the lowliest monk
Addendum: For those not familiar with the whole -MO=Deparse thing the place to look for more info is B::Deparse, and also B and O.
In reply to Say it isn't so, -MO=Deparse! by tlm
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |