Michael -- As I had earlier posited, it was just out of curiosity and the question was more in tune with academic curiosity rather than pragmatic correctiveness. I always used to have "named iterators", but when I was programming without them today, this question came up to my mind instantaneously. Though I presumed that the chances were low, because of $_ masquerading values as per the scope, I still wanted to make sure for a fact, that it was not possible. All the noetic exchanges on this subject, have clearly demonstrated that it is not possible and one has to use only named iterators. Thanks, Rex Michael Fowler wrote: On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 02:29:24PM -0700, RTO RTO wrote:
Out of curiousity, why do you prefer not to use a named iterator? They're often more readable than the ever-implicit $_, especially if you end up referring to the variable explicitly in the block. --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
