No, that's actually correct for a prototype of (\@). (Notice how func1(@arr); worked correctly?) The whole question was about why the prototype wasn't working for func2.
In reply to Re^3: Can you explain me the output of this programme. especially in the subroutine func2
by ikegami
in thread Can you explain me the output of this programme. especially in the subroutine func2
by sanketkathalkar
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |