Re^12: Pre vs Post Incrementing variables

[ikegami]

When the values are "placed on the stack" IS "before the subroutine gets whatever it is given.". It gets them when it takes them off the stack.

It gets them on the stack as far as I'm concerned. That a function only gets it arguments after it copes them is a silly concept, considering functions can (and often do) work on the arguments directly on the stack.

So, if (references to) the values resulting from the pre-increments were placed on the stack, instead of references to the preincremented variable, then the anomaly would not arise

There is no value resulting from the pre-increment to "reference". But if such a value were to be created (i.e. if $n were to be copied), then yes, that's correct. I mentioned this in my first post, so I think all's clear now?

[BrowserUk]

or are you being silly?

Am I being silly! Me? You are the one that keeps telling me that I'm "mistaken", quoting passages that can not possible be wrong.

You seem to perceptually misinterpret things that cannot possibly be misinterpreted. The only ways I can that happening so frequently, are if you are a) stupid; b) being deliberately obtuse; c) being deliberately contrary.

And I know you are not stupid.

All clear now?

I have always been very clear. You are the only one who seems confused or ...

[ikegami]

I have always been very clear. You are the only one who seems confused or ...

All I've been doing is explaining what Perl does to you. Now that you finally repeated what I said originally, you're saying I'm confused? Could you please identify what part of what we said is different from what Perl does? If my knowledge of what Perl does is incorrect, I'd like to know.