> If you do it as scalar only. You lose a lot of useful possiblities. This is indisputable. > Why do you mind having an attribute? The problem would seem to be that an lvalue subroutine might return either an array or a scalar, depending on its arguments. That *can't* be resolved at compile-time, no matter how many attributes we give it. > Is there anyting in perl that defines the order of evaluation? Yes. Try this: $hash{<>} = <>; RHS always evaluates first. I'm not sure how critical that rule is though, especially if "assignment to subroutine return value" were a special case. Damian
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able... Johan Vromans
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be ... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines shoul... Johan Vromans
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be ... Johan Vromans
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines shoul... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines s... Johan Vromans
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines s... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines s... Johan Vromans
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines s... Chaim Frenkel
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines shoul... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able to retu... David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able to return an... David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able to retu... Johan Vromans
- Re: RFC 132 (v1) subroutines should be able to ... Tom Christiansen