In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
@ary[0] = foo()
the following code
@ary= foo()
obviously evaluates @foo in a list context, but in the first I'm no
longer sure.
--
Piers
It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a
Thus it was written in the epistle of Piers Cawley,
In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
@ary[0] = foo()
Scalar, I would think.
Just my guess,
Ted
--
Ted Ashton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | From the Tom Swifty collection:
Southern Adventist University| Multiplication
On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 12:12:14PM -0500, Ted Ashton wrote:
Thus it was written in the epistle of Piers Cawley,
In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
@ary[0] = foo()
Scalar, I would think.
I assume that the following would make the assignment a slice
and
Piers Cawley:
# In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
#
# @ary[0] = foo()
The short answer is scalar context. The long answer is below. Note
that the long answer is only the way I think of it. You may think
differently.
I like to think of it as 'one context'.
In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
@ary[0] = foo()
Scalar context. @ary[0] is a single element of @ary.
To call foo() in list context use any of the following:
(@ary[0]) = foo(); # Assign @ary[0] the first element returned
On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 06:39:02AM +1100, Damian Conway wrote:
In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
@ary[0] = foo()
Scalar context. @ary[0] is a single element of @ary.
To call foo() in list context use any of the following:
(@ary[0]) =
@ary[0] =()= foo(); #
Hm, thats a change from perl5. In perl5 that would assign the number of
elements returned from foo(). Is there a good reason for this change ?
Firstly, Larry may have to rule on which behaviour actually *is* invoked
Brent Dax [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Piers Cawley:
# In the following code fragment, what context is foo() in?
#
# @ary[0] = foo()
The short answer is scalar context. The long answer is below. Note
that the long answer is only the way I think of it. You may think
differently.
I
