in reply to Re: Uninitialized or not?
in thread Uninitialized or not?

That is not the opposite direction. I want an option.

What would make sense would be to separate 'use strict "refs"' into two options, one for symbolic references and one for undefined references, so you could ignore errors from $u->[0] without having to autovivify (the difference being whether you want simply evaluating $u->[0] to set $u -- I can see wanting to ignore that error, but I don't see much point in having simple evaluation silently setting things).

Add to this an option to disable autovivification in left-hand context and we'd all be happy.

        - tye

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (tye)Re: Uninitialized or not?
by demerphq (Chancellor) on Nov 27, 2002 at 22:18 UTC
    Well, i can see your idea about strict being useful for sure. But for me the one thing id like to see is that @{undef} returns 0 or () in a rhs context and not throw an error. If I have to twiddle an option then fine. If that means it gets autovivified then thats fine too. Although id prefer that things dont get autovivified on read. Even multilevel accesses.

    :-)

    --- demerphq
    my friends call me, usually because I'm late....