in reply to Re^6: How to simulate a preprocessor macro without one?
in thread How to simulate a preprocessor macro without one?

...to see the problem in my viewpoint.

sorry I have no real idea what you want...

Cheers Rolf

UPDATE: I'm speculating you don't want to "overload qq" but simulate operators working on variable names.

So please explain, what's the problem with PadWalker (as already suggested) for lexical vars and (if necessary) inspecting the stash (symbol table hash) for package vars???

  • Comment on Re^7: How to simulate a preprocessor macro without one?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Partially Solved: How to simulate a preprocessor macro without one?
by AriSoft (Sexton) on Feb 13, 2010 at 15:04 UTC
    Hello again Monks, Thank you for your advices. I made my program with padwalker and it worked but there was some problems. The solution was not optimal in some aspects like speed and memory consumption. Also the solution was ugly.

    Now I see that my question directed the issue in the wrong direction. Actually I needed two separate tools. One tool for accessing lexical variables from the caller and an another tool to simplify the resulting code after the first problem is solved.

    This is the idea how the template program peeks inside the callers variables.

    sub template { my $uplevel = shift; $uplevel->('print $x;'); $uplevel->('print $y;'); } my $x = 'X'; for my $y (1 .. 3) { template( sub{eval(shift)} ); };
    Now - only the second problem needs to be solved. How to write  template( sub{eval(shift)} ); somehow shorter way?