Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

[abigail]

On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 11:49:44AM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "Peter" == Peter Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> Peter> Quite.  But on a tangent, I see no good reason why this shouldn't be
> Peter> given the same interpretation as "my ($a, $b, $c)" on the grounds that
> Peter> functions taking list arguments that omit their parentheses swallow up
> Peter> the following list.
> 
> *some* functions.  localtime doesn't.  my is a unary function, prototyped
> vaguely as (\$) or (\@) or (\%).


If my() would be an unary function, how come that 

    my ($foo, $bar);

makes $bar a lexical variable?


my just isn't a function. Just like return or while aren't, even when 
followed by parenthesis. They are language constructs.



Abigail