Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW

Re: Potential Ternary Operator Bug

by merlyn (Sage)
on Dec 10, 2001 at 21:13 UTC ( #130708=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Potential Ternary Operator Bug

My hunch is that this "works" in the same way that @a->[3] "works", in that an array name is sometimes automatically a reference to that array, even though the language definition would argue otherwise. I've heard it would take deep voodoo to get the current interpreter to have the right info to reject that, so we'll have to wait until perl 6, where it'll be blessed instead of cursed. {grin}

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Potential Ternary Operator Bug
by robin (Chaplain) on Dec 11, 2001 at 18:49 UTC
    It's actually very easy to get the interpreter to reject @a->[3] - I'm not sure how the rumour that it's hard began. I wrote a very simple patch, which is in bleadperl, to deprecate that usage:

    [robin@penderel perl@12959]$ ./perl -we '@x->[2]'
    Using an array as a reference is deprecated at -e line 1.

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://130708]
and all is quiet...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others romping around the Monastery: (7)
As of 2016-12-06 21:04 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    On a regular basis, I'm most likely to spy upon:

    Results (117 votes). Check out past polls.