--- Bernie Cosell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 1 Feb 2005 at 12:36, Ronald J Kimball wrote:
>
> > ... A list assignment in scalar context
> > returns the number of elements on the right-hand
> side of the assignment.
>
> Which is an odd inconsistency, because in list
> context a list assignment
> returns the left-hand-side-list, so you might guess
> that in scalar
> context it'd return the number of elements in the
> lhs list...
It seems there are multiple contexts flying around.
I'm no expert, but it seems to develop this way:
$foo = $bar = (9,8,7);
RHS list
$bar scalar
$bar <- 7 (last element of list)
$foo <- 7
$foo = ($bar) = (9,8,7);
RHS list
($bar) array
$bar <- 7 (rest discarded)
$foo <- 3, size of RHS of ($bar) assignment
Therefore,
$foo = () = (9,8,7)
RHS list
() array
no assignment targets, but...
$foo <- 3, size of RHS of () assignment
My assumption is that =()= creates an intermediate
assignment, which subtley shifts the context so that
$foo gets the count of (9,8,7) in the last case,
instead of the last element of (9,8,7) as in the first
case.
=()= forks the assigment flow. The elements of the
right operand are assigned (if possible) to the
contained array, as in
$foo = ($bar) = (9,8,7);
or
$foo = @bar = (9,8,7);
The left operand of =()= is assigned the element count
of the other assignment.
Someone familiar with the core will have to clue me in
on the accuracy of my theory.
-QM
=====
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Quantum Mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com
