On Fri, 14 Jun 2002 11:27:33 -0400 (EDT), Jeff 'japhy' Pinyan wrote:
>>On Fri, 14 Jun 2002 00:21:16 -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>>
>>>The history is someone noticed that since this:
>>>
>>> my $foo; $foo = $foo . 42
>>> Use of uninitialized value at -e line 1.
>>>
>>>and this:
>>>
>>> my $foo; $foo .= 42
>>>
>>>are logically the same, the former shouldn't warn.
....
>if we start allowing undef values when they're being used for
>concatenation, we'll stop being warned when we might want to be. :(
What's so special about concatenation, anyway?
my $foo; $foo += 42;
no warning.
my $foo; $foo = $foo + 42;
Use of uninitialized value in addition (+)
So what makes "." different from "+"?
I really don't like exceptions to general rules.
--
Bart.
