On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 06:46:50PM +0800, Audrey Tang wrote:
> >Does this mean a single named parameter called $x, or a default invocant
> >and a single required positional named $x?
>
> "A default invocant" prolly doesn't make sense there... There's
> nothing to "default" to. :-)
What invocant is constructed in this signature then?
method foo ($just_a_named_param)
Is the signature for &foo really the same as that of bar?
sub bar ($just_a_named_param)
I was sort of assuming you could tell by a signature if it was for a
method or a sub.
--
Gaal Yahas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://gaal.livejournal.com/
