Re: freaky deaky plus sign usage

in reply to freaky deaky plus sign usage

This is to get around Perl's 'indirect object syntax'.

Otherwise
ok Mock::Basic->update(...);
looks like
Mock::Basic->ok->update(...);
which is probably not what is intended.

ok(Mock::Basic->update(...)); works as well.

Comment on Re: freaky deaky plus sign usage Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: freaky deaky plus sign usage by metaperl (Curate) on Jul 31, 2009 at 18:37 UTC
ok, and how does `+` "get around" it? What exactly is syntactically happening? Is "ok" being added to "Mock::Basic->update(...)"	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: freaky deaky plus sign usage by Anonymous Monk on Jul 31, 2009 at 19:23 UTC
No, the return value from Mock::Basic->update() is numified (if it had a 0+ overload, it gets called). CSJewell, I just don't want to log in atm.	[reply]
Re^4: freaky deaky plus sign usage by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Aug 01, 2009 at 02:31 UTC
The search terms above don't seem to match any node. Anyone got a clue?	[reply]
Re^5: freaky deaky plus sign usage by JadeNB (Chaplain) on Aug 01, 2009 at 17:11 UTC
Re^6: freaky deaky plus sign usage by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Aug 02, 2009 at 06:03 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^4: freaky deaky plus sign usage by Anonymous Monk on Aug 02, 2009 at 15:36 UTC
unary-plus does NOT numify. `0+` does not get called. - ikegami	[reply] [d/l]
Re^3: freaky deaky plus sign usage by Anonymous Monk on Aug 01, 2009 at 02:58 UTC
`perl -MCGI -MTest::More -e " ok 1; ok +CGI->new, +CGI->new; ok scalar +CGI->new; ok( CGI->new ); ok CGI->new; " ok 1 ok 2 - CGI=HASH(0x1a08a30) ok 3 ok 4 Undefined subroutine CGI::ok at -e line 1 # Tests were run but no plan was declared and done_testing() was not s +een.` [download]	[reply] [d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom