Re^3: Scope and references

Actually, for creates two lexical scopes. One for the entire statement, and one of the block body.

You've already demonstrated the second. Here's a demonstration of the first:

>perl -e"use strict; for (my @x) { } @x"
Global symbol "@x" requires explicit package name at -e line 1.
Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
[download]

it seems like you don't "leave" the scope in which @a was delcared,

It's pretty clear to me the curly is the end of the scope, and you do indeed reach it.

Also, I still don't understand why the 'wrong' version creates the data structure that it does. Any thoughts on that one?

my @a;
push @container, \@a;
push @container, \@a;
[download]

Isn't it clear that it puts two references to the same variable into @container? Why do you think your loop is different?

Comment on Re^3: Scope and references Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Scope and references by 7stud (Deacon) on Jun 20, 2011 at 08:01 UTC
Actually, for creates two lexical scopes. One for the entire statement, and one of the block body. You've already demonstrated the second. Here's a demonstration of the first: `>perl -e"use strict; for (my @x) { } @x" Global symbol "@x" requires explicit package name at -e line 1. Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.` [download] I don't think your example serves to prove your statement. Here's what I think is a better example: `use strict; use warnings; use 5.010; for (my @x) { my @x; } my @y; my @y; #line 10 --output:-- "my" variable @y masks earlier declaration in same scope at perl.pl li +ne 10.` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Scope and references by ikegami (Patriarch) on Jun 20, 2011 at 17:03 UTC
No, that only shows that there are two scopes total, not that `for` created two lexical scopes. You'd need `my @x; for (my @x) { my @x; }` [download] Mine does show the same though. If `for` only created the scope int the curlier, my code wouldn't have died.	[reply] [d/l] [select]