Re: recursive anonymous subroutines

[Zaxo]

in reply to recursive anonymous subroutines

No.

That's too bad, too. I've occasionally wanted something like that myself.

What semantics should that have, do you think? A magical local variable which points to the current block? [Added]: Or extend redo to apply to code blocks?

[ambrus]

The J language has something like that, a magical operator called $: which always refers to the innermost verb it is used at.

However, I don't like that, and don't think it would be a good idea for perl. I'd rather like something like (one form of) the let macro in scheme. The equivalent to this would be something like this in perl: the hypothetical let NAME { BODY } ARGS could be equivalent to do { my sub NAME { BODY }; NAME(ARGS); }, where you can call NAME in the BODY too. Except we'd need a different name instead of let.

Update: redo wouldn't help. That only works if you have tail recursion. Redo doesn't return.

[Daryn]

the whole point is not to name the beast. I like the idea of a $thingy :

(sub {... $thingy->(...) ... )->(args);

would suit me just fine. Oh well. I can live without it.
Thanks again.

[Anonymous Monk]

It's been done.

use Sub::Recursive;

recursive { ... $REC->(...) ... }->(args)