http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=974166


in reply to Re: What operator should perl5porters use for safe dereferencing?
in thread What operator should perl5porters use for safe dereferencing?

Interesting - in contrast to your statement, I didn't understand the relevance of the ampersand until the very end of the discussion thread here and found its inclusion in the poll puzzling. I didn't read it as $bar *AND* call method method() on $bar; instead, I read it as the C "address-of" operator. Goes to show that what may seem understandable and intuitive to one person may not be at all for another.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: What operator should perl5porters use for safe dereferencing?
by ambrus (Abbot) on Apr 05, 2013 at 11:14 UTC

    I guess you're right, the ampersand isn't so obvious.

    The problem is, reading the ampersand meaning address of could even make sense in perl. You could want an operator to create a bound method call, so eg. $object&->method creates a bound method like do { my $o = $object; sub { $o->method(@_); } }, and $object&&->method creates a bound method call weakly referencing the object.