Update: I feel reluctant to add this, but what you asked for is really possible through an exotic beast you should ignore for the moment, called symref. But as I wrote above, Don't. If you explain in more detail what it is that you really want, then someone will certainly explain you how to achieve it with real refs. My suspect here is that you want a dispatch table...
Update: I know it is pointless, but would any of those who downvoted this care to explain why?!? Or do you really think we should second a newbie's intuitive desire to use symrefs and teach him/her how to do so?
Update to the update: as correctly pointed out by davorg at Re^2: Calling a subroutine from a scalar, I originally had mistyped perlre for perlref
In reply to Re: Calling a subroutine from a scalar
by blazar
in thread Calling a subroutine from a scalar
by metalgear119
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |