Re^2: local our?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: local our? by LanX (Saint) on Apr 14, 2019 at 21:25 UTC
> > disables use strict `vars` for $bob for the remainder of current scope. > For my interest, is that actually how our is implemented ... no, see my other answer in this thread. `our $bob` is aliasing at compile time a "simple" symbol `$bob` to a full qualified `$__PACKAGE__::bob` for the remainder of current scope. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^3: local our? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Apr 05, 2006 at 14:16 UTC
I'm not sure I understand your question. I didn't mention any algorithm, so I don't see how I could have spoken of implementation. I described its function and its effect.	[reply]
Re^4: local our? by aufflick (Deacon) on Apr 07, 2006 at 02:10 UTC
Sorry, I didn't fully qualify that question. I was interested in how the perl compiler/runtime implements the `our` directive (if anyone here happens to know that).	[reply]
Re^5: local our? by Errto (Vicar) on Apr 07, 2006 at 04:08 UTC
I'm not an internals guy, but I think loosely speaking what the compiler does is create a glob entry for that variable name in the current package's symbol table. This way, even when `strict` is in effect, the compiler can verify that that variable name, used unqualified, is valid because that name exists in the symbol table (after it checks that there's no lexical with that name in the pad). Actually it has to do a little more than that, because the scope of the `our` declaration is lexical; that is, you can do this: `package A; our $foo; package B; print $foo;` [download] and it will still be referring to $A::foo. Not sure how it handles that.	[reply] [d/l] [select]