Steve Grazzini wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 01:04:40PM -0400, Paul Kraus wrote:
> > Thanks for all good advice. However why is the & in front of
> > the sub routine call a bad idea.
>
> Check:
>
> % perldoc perlsub
>
> In Perl5, the ampersand changes how the subroutine call is parsed
> and executed. If you use it with parentheses, then prototypes will
> be disabled (which is presumably not what you intended).
>
> sub foo (\@) { print "@_\n"; }
> sub bar {
> foo(@ary); # passed by reference
> &foo(@ary); # @ary gets *flattened*
> }
>
>
> If you use the ampersand without parens, then the called subroutine
> "shares" your argument list:
>
> sub foo { print "@_\n" }
> sub bar {
> &foo; # like foo(@_);
> foo; # like foo();
> }
>
> Both of these forms have their (occasional) places, but you should
> be aware of what they really do.
Yeah.
Like what he said.
R
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
