And then there's 1..100_000 that creates an array and 100,000 scalars at compile-time.
It does? How can you tell?
Neither B::Deparse nor B::Concise seem to indicate that, nor the compile time memory consumption.
In reply to Re^4: Why is const x const not a const?
by moritz
in thread Why is const x const not a const?
by PerlGrey
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |