Hi Paul,
Paul Vixie wrote:
> Raymond Wan <r...@kuicr.kyoto-u.ac.jp> writes:
>> Thank you for your explanation! I never knew about the difference
>> between the two. Actually, I never knew that "return" could take a URL
>> as an argument.
>
> return isn't taking a URL as an argument. in fact the function's return
> value is meaningless, and the real intent is to call $m->comp() and then
> immediately return. this:
>
> if (not $success) {
> return $m->comp('/BAR', %ARGS);
> }
>
> is shorthand for this:
>
> if (not $success) {
> $m->comp('/BAR', %ARGS);
> return;
> }
I think I'm cluing in [finally!]. I guess that the first set of statements
*is* legal Perl since the "return" statement takes an expression.
"$m->comp('/BAR', %ARGS)" in this case is treated as an expression and is
evaluated first before returning. That's all.
However, I didn't know that $m->comp returns a value. It could return
additional code that would be displayed in the web page, but it doesn't have
to. So, $m->comp seems still different from something like:
if (not $success) {
return (fn());
}
where fn() is a function/subroutine that [hopefully] returns a value to the
current function which then gets passed back up again.
Otherwise, it seems just a little different from Perl...
Ray
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Mason-users mailing list
Mason-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mason-users
