The following are all implemented differently:

• for (EXPR; EXPR; EXPR) ("C-style for loop", an augmented while loop.)
• for (EXPRX..EXPRY) (A range and nothing else.)
• for (reverse CONSTX..CONSTY) (A constant range, preceded by reverse.)
• for (reverse EXPRX..EXPRY) (A variable range, preceded by reverse.)
• for (@ARRAY) (An array and nothing else.)
• for (reverse @ARRAY) (Reverse of an array and nothing else.)
• for (reverse LIST) (Reverse of any list that doesn't fit the above patterns.)
• for (LIST) (Any list that doesn't fit the above patterns.)

You might find the difference between foreach (@ARRAY) and foreach (LIST) interesting.

{
   my $x = 1;
   my $y = 4;

   # The initial values are saved.

   my @a;

   foreach ($x..$y) {
      push @a, $_;
      $y++;
   }

   print("@a\n");
   # 1 2 3 4
}

{
   my $x = 1;
   my $y = 4;

   # The initial values are saved.

   my @a;

   foreach (reverse $x..$y) {
      push @a, $_;
      $x--;
   }

   print("@a\n");
   # 4 3 2 1
}

{
   my @a = (1, 2, 3, 4);
   my $i = 5;

   # Loops "while (pass_num < @a)".
   # In this case, that means loop forever.

   foreach (@a) {  # Loops "while (pass_num < @a)"
      push(@a, $i++);
      if (@a == 20) { push(@a, '...'); last; }  # Avoid infinite loop.
   }

   print("@a\n");
   # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ...
}

{
   my @a = (1, 2);
   my @b = (3, 4);
   my $i = 5;

   # Creates a list at the start of the
   # loop and iterates over that list.
   # In this case, elements are added to @b,
   # but not to the list on the stack, so
   # it loops 4 times.

   foreach (@a, @b) {
      push(@b, $i++);
   }

   print("@a @b\n");
   # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
}
[download]

The difference between
foreach (reverse CONSTX..CONSTY)
and
foreach (reverse EXPRX..EXPRY)
is that the list in built at compile time in the former.

>perl -le "for (1..2) { for (reverse 1..3) { print; $_=5; } }"
3
2
1
5
5
5

>perl -le "for (1..2) { for (reverse 1..($x=3)) { print; $_=5; } }"
3
2
1
3
2
1
[download]

Empirical evidence suggests ;) the list given to foreach (...) is not being re-evaluated upon every iteration -- though I wouldn't want to rely on it... As Fletch already said, just "don't muck with arrays you're looping over".