Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able to return an lvalue

[Randal L. Schwartz]

>>>>> "Johan" == Johan Vromans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

Johan> Why not? I couldn't find in the Camel that the right side must be
Johan> evaluated first (at least not where the assignment operator = is
Johan> discussed according to the index).

Shouldn't:

  sub magicguy {
    lreturn @a;
  }

  magicguy() = reverse @a;

work the same as:

  @a = reverse @a;

So we must evaluate the right code before we start modifying the left.

Oh wait, I'm hosed here.  Duh.  We can still run the code on the left
to return the lvalue!

In any event, your comment that it should always be scalar is cool,
but would prevent the code I'm giving right here from running.

So is that something we've agreed, that lvalue subs are *always*
scalars?  That'd mean we can move on to the various implementation
details. :)

-- 
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!