Re^3: What would be the easier way

Comment on Re^3: What would be the easier way Download Code
Re^4: What would be the easier way by james2vegas (Hermit) on Mar 04, 2013 at 01:47 UTC
That is not an array, but an array reference.	[reply]
Re^5: What would be the easier way by Anonymous Monk on Mar 04, 2013 at 01:51 UTC
That is not an array, but an array reference. And what do you call this "array reference", what is the name of the array it refers to ?	[reply]
Re^6: What would be the easier way by james2vegas (Hermit) on Mar 04, 2013 at 01:58 UTC
It doesn't reference a named array, it references an anonymous array.	[reply]
Re^7: What would be the easier way by Anonymous Monk on Mar 04, 2013 at 02:00 UTC
Re^8: What would be the easier way by dsheroh (Parson) on Mar 04, 2013 at 10:38 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^4: What would be the easier way by Anonymous Monk on Mar 07, 2013 at 09:15 UTC
You pronounce that height-of-$input or height-of-house or height-of-table See Re: What are the most basic, generic aspects of programming?, Re: Perl Best Practices for naming variables, About the use of the plural form for the name of variables	[reply]