Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Uri Guttman <uri@stemsystems.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.perl.misc
Subject: Re: Embedding code in qq{}?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 00:14:51 -0400
Organization: albasani.net
Lines: 37
Message-ID: <878vixtef8.fsf@stemsystems.com>
References: <87limyk471.fsf@Gmail.com> <1fjg39-qnv2.ln1@anubis.morrow.me.uk> <jk5nht$ot8$1@reader1.panix.com> <86fwd5wl9d.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> <jk657m$383$1@reader1.panix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: news.albasani.net zmyvKZonKSUuIlNLr05PCPrEjRR3z4GmrwOwlxzBw9V7cJcit5i+C38WUTNK/hkaNzgyAzyaZSUDD5U7zr7EfN4VLhOuNJaXNgOIguFb9XGHWk1OItHdZIhV9bc9K3aL
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 04:15:34 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.albasani.net; logging-data="49LeZnDiN55ybctWACyz40wWa3atgfjST21ORug9MyOiJ3oATDwjRxOibtKx2xyAmmlCmrhjvZNKtuXy03kq3cm3qxGNsRoLwVBZ4W+bZkQGBARqW0+inDI7vOoUqMOk"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@albasani.net"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9L8A/h7eXfox9fvK8uFObCSCsDU= sha1:QVJPcoZwR8NOYAWbxLXTFkSPBoY=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.perl.misc:4804

>>>>> "TM" == Tim McDaniel <tmcd@panix.com> writes:

  TM> In article <86fwd5wl9d.fsf@red.stonehenge.com>,
  TM> Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com> wrote:
  >>>>>>> "Tim" == Tim McDaniel <tmcd@panix.com> writes:
  >> 
  Tim> print "scalar: ", ${tester()}, "\n";
  >> 
  >> I'm amazed this works.

  TM> Why?  The basic syntax for a scalar variable is $identifier, and man
  TM> perlref (Perl 5.10):

please put your sarcasm detector on high gain. do you realize who you
replied to?

  Tim> print "array: ", @{tester()}, "\n";
  >> 
  >> You forgot the square brackets.

  TM> No, I didn't.  They are not required -- just a BLOCK that returns a
  TM> reference to an array.  Of course, square brackets are a convenient
  TM> way to generate such a reference.  Had tester been called in an array
  TM> context (which, as I noted, in retrospect would make no sense), it
  TM> would have returned [ 11, 12, 13 ].

without the [] it isn't close to the idiom being discussed. and as i
mentioned it wasn't in "" so it really bypasses the idiom. a plain deref
is just a plain deref, nothing to jump up and down about.

  TM> I just ran this in Perl 5.10:

  TM> In the "pondering" case, nary a square bracket in sight.

you are wandering in the wilderness. please go home! :)

uri