![]() |
|
go ahead... be a heretic | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( #3333=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
> IMHO the first sentence doesn't apply here because eof's syntax can be expressed by a prototype
Depends how you define "syntax can be expressed by a prototype". A "can be parsed without errors" criteria is not enough for me. eof(); and eof; are (magically) different syntax for eof, and this difference can't be expressed with prototypes. In the past the prototype symbol set was extended with *, + or _ in order to add prototypes to other built-ins. This criteria isn't met here.
Cheers Rolf In reply to Re^2: Why does eof have a prototype?
by LanX
|
|