Re^4: Arrgh, can() appears to work for non-object !!

Does that mean that it's safe to infer that perl will, if it thinks it appropriate, treat all literals/string constants as class names ?

A user level that continues to overstate my experience :-))

Comment on Re^4: Arrgh, can() appears to work for non-object !!

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Arrgh, can() appears to work for non-object !! by JavaFan (Canon) on Jan 07, 2009 at 12:44 UTC
Does that mean that it's safe to infer that perl will, if it thinks it appropriate, treat all literals/string constants as class names ? No. It will only treat strings that start with a letter or underscore to be class names: `$ perl -wE 'say "fred" -> can ("can")' Use of uninitialized value in say at -e line 1. $ perl -wE 'say "1fred" -> can ("can")' Can't call method "can" without a package or object reference at -e li +ne 1. $ perl -wE 'say " " -> can ("can")' Can't call method "can" without a package or object reference at -e li +ne 1. $ perl -wE 'say "f r e d" -> can ("can")' Use of uninitialized value in say at -e line 1. $` [download] But this "autocasting" is not surprising. Perl does that all the time. String can be numbers or regexes. Numbers can be strings. Floats can be integers, etc.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: Arrgh, can() appears to work for non-object !! by shmem (Chancellor) on Jan 07, 2009 at 12:39 UTC
No. That's only true for a Literal in `Literal->method` an only if method is in `UNIVERSAL`.	[reply] [d/l] [select]