in reply to $obj->method v.s. $obj->method()

Your assertion, regarding the difference between $f; and &f();, doesn't ring quite true - consider 
sub frobnicate {
  &foo;
  &bar();
}

[download]
The statement &foo; calls foo using a mirror image of @_ i.e. as passed to frobnicate - whereas, as you point out, &bar() calls bar with an empty argument list - but neither call i.e. to foo() or bar(), modifies @_ as passed to frobnicate.

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

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: $obj->method v.s. $obj->method()
by lodin (Hermit) on May 12, 2009 at 00:35 UTC

    The statement &foo; calls foo using a mirror image of @_ /.../ neither call /.../ modifies @_ as passed to frobnicate

    By "mirror image" you mean the same, right? Just to be clear, the call &foo; may actually modify frobnicate's @_.

    See Re^2: Using & in function calls (&foo != foo(@_)) for an example.

    lodin

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom