in reply to Re^4: Declare and slice-initialize hash in one statement?
in thread Declare and slice-initialize hash in one statement?

I'm not adverse to using the minutiae of Perl's syntax, but that is just a little subtle for my taste. I also get confused about when the use of & implies reusing the current @_.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: Declare and slice-initialize hash in one statement?
by Roy Johnson (Monsignor) on Oct 27, 2005 at 17:46 UTC
    Without &, parentheses are optional and prototypes are observed. With &, prototypes are ignored and you must supply parens, or @_ gets inherited.
    Caution: Contents may have been coded under pressure.
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

      Yeah, just too darn subtle. 

      sub x (\@\@) { print "@_" }

@_ = qw[ some random junk retained from the current level of call ];
@a = 1..10; @b='a'..'g';

x @a, @b;
ARRAY(0x1961458) ARRAY(0x196156c)

&x( @a, @b );
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a b c d e f g

&x, @a, @b;
some random junk retained from the current level of call

      [download]
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
[d/l]
        You realize you aren't passing any arguments to &x in the last example?
[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom