Mailing List Archive: lexicals and prototypes and all

On Mon, 20 Nov 1995, Tom Christiansen wrote:

> it seems to me that there's a problem with the idea of assigning
> a parameter like this
>
> f(\@list);

Actually, that should be "f(@list);".

> sub f(\@) {
> local *sym = $_[0];
> }
>
> the problem is that you can't do that with my only with local, and you want
> to do my. also, you can't do it at all with use strict vars.
>
> what do you think? is this enough of a reason to think about
> whether you want to do an automatic lexical aliasing with named paraeters?
>
> that is
>
> sub f(\@alist) { ... }
>
> would make @alist an alias for the reference parameter's referee and still
> work under use strict?

To my way of thinking, this is partially related to the fact that you need
to say "local($_);", instead of "my($_);". The problem isn't the same, but
the result is: local() is still needed, despite being depreciated by my().
I don't have any idea what to do about this, though.

> --tom

--
Kenneth Albanowski (kjahds@kjahds.com, CIS: 70705,126)