Luke Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/4/05, Ingo Blechschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > my $undef = undef;
> > say $undef.chars? # 0? undef? die?
> > say chars $undef; # 0? undef? die?
> > I'd opt for "undef.chars" to be an error ("no such method") and "chars
> > undef" to return 0 (with a warning printed to STDERR^W$*ERR).
> Well, I think that "chars $undef" should be exactly equivalent to
> "$undef.chars". In fact, I think it is: "chars $undef" is just the
> indirect object form.
Didn't $Larry rule that method calls on undef return undef, for the
same reason array and hash subscripting does?
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Perl and Parrot hacker