On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 01:21:12PM +0300, Ilmari Karonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Shouldn't that rather be
>
> use constant NOTHING => ();
yes, I noted that as well (but for some reason I forgot to reply to the
list). This one indeed works, until you try to do this:
use constant NOTHING => (),
FIVE => 5;
Since () is not a constant (it really is _nothing_ ;) I would not be
surprised if constant.pm would turn it into undef in a future version or
(like currently) treats it as nonexistant.
> so it will return the empty list in list context? Or one could just
> simply write
>
> return;
>
> instead.
Yupp. Some people prefer moe-explicit notions, though (similar to:
never_return_function();
# never returns, this comment is not neccessary
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
