numerically named vars

[rir]

I was about to say murky, but unimportant but bit my tongue
as everything is important to someone.

It seems unclear what behavior is intended, i.e. murky.
Why shouldn't I be able to my $99;?   I haven't seen anything to
suggest it is illegal. Or why is $123456 read-only?

Is this documented somewhere? Point me at it.

I'm pretty sure I got that from the Camel book.

[demerphq]

Its partly documented in perlvar but mostly in the camel. Basically all the digit scalars are used for doing pattern match storage. Apparently one of the other scripting langugae had a limit (i think 9) on the number of capture buffers allowed. I believe it was a matter of pride that perl could handle an unbounded number (ykwim). And as all of the capture buffers are read-only that makes them all read only. The lexical bit I dont remember. :-)

--- demerphq
my friends call me, usually because I'm late....

[Shendal]

From perldoc perlvar:

$<digits>
Contains the subpattern from the corresponding set of parentheses in the last pattern matched, not counting patterns matched in nested blocks that have been exited already. (Mnemonic: like \digits.) These variables are all read-only.


Cheers,
Shendal