Re^4: 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]

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]

Comment on Re^4: Scope and references Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
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]