> FOR > --- > 1. It becomes more consistent with other Perl functions my is not a function. It is a declaration. Functions take arguments and return values. my does not. It is language construct like if. Unless, of course, you claim that if is a function, too. That ways lies LISP. I actually like LISP, but why reinvent it...? -- $jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/ # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'. # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
- Re: Closures and default lexi... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for... Randal L. Schwartz
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope... Peter Scott
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope... abigail
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for... abigail
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for sub... Branden
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for... John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs David Grove
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs Branden
- The binding of "my" (Re: Closures and de... Nathan Wiger
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closure... Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closure... Branden
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Clo... John Porter
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Closure... John Porter
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re: Clo... Simon Cozens
- Re: The binding of "my" (Re:... John Porter
- Re: The binding of "my"... Johan Vromans
- Re: The binding of "my&q... John Porter
- Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs John Porter