At 04:17 PM 3/31/00 -0700, Joseph N. Hall wrote:
>* ObPerl: How to explain to a class of complete novices why parens are needed
>* in my ($x, $y); but if you follow a general rule of "put parens in
>* everywhere until you figure out where you can leave them out" you get
>* benign warnings "foo(...) interpreted as function"...
>
>Because my acts as a "list modifier." The semantics are the same whether
>or not you have the my:
>
> $a, $b = $x, $y; # not too good
> my $a, $b = $x, $y; # not too good either
>
> ($a, $b) = ($x, $y);
> my ($a, $b) = ($x, $y);
>
>No matter what you do, the = operator always has higher precedence
>than the comma operator. Whether there's a my involved doesn't affect
>that.
Yes, but I was talking about the case where there is no assignment, just
my ($x, $y);
Novice sees this and thinks, "Those parens must be unnecessary for the same
reason that they are in "print (args);", no? Is 'my' a function?...
(checks perlfunc, there it is)... okay" (boom, subtle error).
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies
