in reply to Re^3: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?)
in thread Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined?

The new value is still passed by reference, but all of this is besides the point. As I said, such mechanisms weren't used.
  • Comment on Re^4: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Why is the execution order of subexpressions undefined? (why not?)
by diotalevi (Canon) on Jul 15, 2006 at 00:02 UTC

    Yeah... it's the closest we get to it. What I really wish we had was not only undefined execution order but *delayed*execution* so nothing actually ran until you really needed it.

    ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

[reply]
      Is this something planned for Perl6? I know it will have lazy lists.
[reply]
      Be careful what you wish for. Haskell has lazy evaluation, but it is extremely easy to create a program plagued with space leaks. And if you eliminate the automatic memoization, you'll end up turning your space leaks into time leaks.
[reply]

        Oh genie? I wish for sanity too. There are places in real code that I want this to happen.

        ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom