Re^15: If you believe in Lists in Scalar Context, Clap your Hands

[ysth]

No, I'm not confused. Operators do something and return something. This is both what happens and what appears to happen. The assignment operator gets the list on the right, it doesn't in any way produce or return it.

[mr_mischief]

Who cares about the list on the right. What appears to happen to the list on the left? It appears to be yielded by the assignment. In fact, it is, but as a side effect.

[ysth]

I'm confused by this. Are you now talking about something different than the "produces...a list for the list" in 719455?

[ikegami]

mr_mischief likes to think in a very right-to-left way when it comes to assignment operator. In his mental model,

1. The list assignment operator returns two values to the list on its LHS, a list to assign and its scalar result.
2. The LHS list takes the list returned by the list assignment and performs the assignment.
3. The LHS list returns the scalar returned by the list assignment.

He realizes the implementation differs.

[mr_mischief]

i am indeed talking about:

The assignment operator itself happens to be both in scalar and in list context. It produces both a list for the list, and a scalar

from 719455. The antecedent I intended for "it" was, however, "the assignment operator itself" and not the list on the right. In the "list for the list" part, the first "list" is the list value assigned through the side effect of the assignment operator and the second "list" is the list on the left which is assigned the value.

I think that covers the possible misunderstandings. I'm sorry if I wasn't more clear, or if I still need to be more clear. I may have misunderstood which part you misunderstood.