Re^3: A curious case of of my()

It wouldn't fix the following:

foo() and my $x;
foo() or my $x;
foo() && my $x;
foo() || my $x;
foo() // my $x;
foo() ? my $x : 1;
[download]

Not to mention that some code relies on the current behaviour.

Comment on Re^3: A curious case of of my() Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: A curious case of of my() by LanX (Saint) on Apr 05, 2011 at 16:18 UTC
> Not to mention that some code relies on the current behaviour. unlikely, without a new scope this would lead to warnings like `"my" variable $x masks earlier declaration` all these cases should be treated alike, (also see update in former post) AFAIK post-fix `if` is always internally translated into a short-circuit `and`. Cheers Rolf	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: A curious case of of my() by ikegami (Patriarch) on Apr 05, 2011 at 18:11 UTC
No, it doesn't, but it does warn "Deprecated use of my() in false conditional" now. AFAIK post-fix if is always internally translated into a short-circuit and. The compiled form of `if` and `unless` always use one of the `and` or `or` opcodes. There is no `if` or `unless` opcode. $ perl -MO=Concise,-exec -e'if (f()) { g() }' 1 <0> enter 2 <;> nextstate(main 3 -e:1) v:{ 3 <0> pushmark s 4 <$> gv(f) s/EARLYCV 5 <1> entersub[t1] sKS/TARG,1 6 <\|> and(other->7) vK/1 7 <0> pushmark s 8 <$> gv(g) s/EARLYCV 9 <1> entersub[t2] vKS/TARG,1 a <@> leave[1 ref] vKP/REFC -e syntax OK $ perl -MO=Concise,-exec -e'if (!f()) { g() }' 1 <0> enter 2 <;> nextstate(main 3 -e:1) v:{ 3 <0> pushmark s 4 <$> gv(f) s/EARLYCV 5 <1> entersub[t1] sKS/TARG,1 6 <\|> or(other->7) vK/1 7 <0> pushmark s 8 <$> gv(g) s/EARLYCV 9 <1> entersub[t2] vKS/TARG,1 a <@> leave[1 ref] vKP/REFC -e syntax OK [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]