"Jenda Krynicky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
3E2E9EDB.5722.62EB5D@localhost">news:3E2E9EDB.5722.62EB5D@localhost...
> From: "Rob Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > There was an example in there that demonstrated
> > using 'our' to implement a C-like 'static' variable.
>
> Well ... if you mean something like
>
> int Inc() {
> static int cnt;
> return cnt++;
> }
>
> then our() is not the right way to do that in Perl. the our() only
> allows you to use the short name instead of $the::complete::one.
It also protects your variable from modification by code which hasn't
declared it.
> This is the way:
>
> {
> my $cnt=0;
> sub Inc {
> return $cnt++;
> }
> }
Yes, but I'm trying here to explain the function of 'our'. This is the
simplest example of it, where there's only one 'us' :)
Yes folks. Declaring a subroutine within a block of its own may be
ugly, but it's the recognised way of implementing persistent
variables. 'our' doesn't protect you variables as completely as
it might.
Cheers,
Rob
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
