Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Your skill will accomplish
what the force of many cannot
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Context: compile-time vs. run-time

by ikegami (Pope)
on Jan 25, 2009 at 16:50 UTC ( #738783=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Context: compile-time vs. run-time

At compile-time, the context is set to one of the following:

  • Void
  • Scalar
  • List
  • From subroutine's caller

An operator cannot control context at run-time. It cannot be any other way because operators are executed after their operands. Consider

@x = ( f(), g(), h() );

There are four ops on the RHS of the assignment. In the order they are called, they are:

  1. entersub(f): Calls f and leaves result on the stack
  2. entersub(g): Calls g and leaves result on the stack
  3. entersub(h): Calls h and leaves result on the stack
  4. list: Filters all but the last element off the stack in scalar context. No-op otherwise

The list operator never has a chance to control the context of its operands since they've already been evaluated by the time the list operator is evaluated.

That is actually the source of a known bug in Perl. What follows explains it. At compile-time, the contexts in which the above operators are evaluated are set as follows:

  1. entersub(f): List
  2. entersub(g): List
  3. entersub(h): List
  4. list: List [*]

And it works well. It also works well in scalar context:

$x = ( f(), g(), h() );
  1. entersub(f): Void
  2. entersub(g): Void
  3. entersub(h): Scalar
  4. list: Scalar

And in void context:

( f(), g(), h() ); 1;
  1. entersub(f): Void
  2. entersub(g): Void
  3. entersub(h): Void
  4. list: Void

And now we're left with the fourth case:

sub { ( f(), g(), h() ) }
  1. entersub(f): From subroutine's caller
  2. entersub(g): From subroutine's caller
  3. entersub(h): From subroutine's caller
  4. list: From subroutine's caller

If we call the subroutine as

@x = sub { ( f(), g(), h() ) }->();

then all's fine:

  1. entersub(f): From subroutine's caller: List
  2. entersub(g): From subroutine's caller: List
  3. entersub(h): From subroutine's caller: List
  4. list: From subroutine's caller: List

But if we call the subroutine as

$x = sub { ( f(), g(), h() ) }->();

we have a bug!

  1. entersub(f): From subroutine's caller: Scalar: should be void!
  2. entersub(g): From subroutine's caller: Scalar: should be void!
  3. entersub(h): From subroutine's caller: Scalar
  4. list: From subroutine's caller: Scalar

Some code to support what I said:

use strict; use warnings; sub cx { print !defined(wantarray()) ? 'v' : !wantarray() ? 's' : 'l'; } my ($x, @x); print('v: '); ( cx(), cx(), cx() ) ; print("\n"); print('cv: '); sub { ( cx(), cx(), cx() ) }->(); print("\n\n"); print('s: '); $x = ( cx(), cx(), cx() ) ; print("\n"); print('cs: '); $x = sub { ( cx(), cx(), cx() ) }->(); print("\n\n"); print('l: '); @x = ( cx(), cx(), cx() ) ; print("\n"); print('cl: '); @x = sub { ( cx(), cx(), cx() ) }->(); print("\n");
v: vvv cv: vvv s: vvs \ mismatch cs: sss / l: lll cl: lll

A practical difference:

use strict; use warnings; my $x; $x = ( 'abc', 'def' ) ; # Warns $x = sub { ( 'abc', 'def' ) }->(); # Doesn't warn
Useless use of a constant in void context at line 5.

* — A list op in list context is subsequently optimized away since it's a no-op there. This does not affect the results.


Comment on Re: Context: compile-time vs. run-time
Select or Download Code

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://738783]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others studying the Monastery: (6)
As of 2015-07-03 08:39 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    The top three priorities of my open tasks are (in descending order of likelihood to be worked on) ...









    Results (49 votes), past polls