>>>>> "APK" == Akhthar Parvez K <akht...@sysadminguide.com> writes:
APK> On Sunday 31 Oct 2010, Shlomi Fish wrote: APK> [ snipped ] >> > &testsub1(); >> >> Don't use leading ampersands in subroutine calls: APK> Suppose a subroutine definition is written down the line and it's APK> called without (), which is the recommended style: APK> &SubRoutine APK> or APK> SubRoutine the recommended style IS to call subs with (). where did you get the opposite idea? APK> I remember I'd read in the past that & should be used in such APK> cases so that Perl can easily recognize I'm attempting to call a APK> subroutine, correct and/or is that (only) required with older APK> versions? no. & is never needed to call a sub in perl5. it was required in perl4. it shouldn't be used in perl5 calls unless you know why and it is a very special case. uri -- Uri Guttman ------ u...@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com -- ----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------ --------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com --------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@perl.org For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-h...@perl.org http://learn.perl.org/
