And what other subtle differences are there between built-in tokens like map and user defined subroutines with a (&@) prototype?
We recently had a similar discussion about the restrictions of prototypes in simulating the behavior of syntax commands and about incomplete documentation.
e.g. here
Re^2: coderefs and (&) prototypes
Hope it helps...
Cheers Rolf
In reply to Re: map and return
by LanX
in thread map and return
by ELISHEVA
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |