Re: [FWP] Constants as array refs

["Bernie Cosell" <bernie@fantasyfarm.com>]

On 23 Mar 2000, at 16:46, Greg Bacon wrote:

> In message <200003232138.e2NLcZY15248@mail.rev.net>,
>     "Bernie Cosell" writes:
> 
> : I don't understand...  I didn't think there was a semantic difference 
> : between:
> :    a()
> : and
> :    &a
> : but apparently there is..  ????
> 
> >From man perlsub:
> 
>     To call subroutines:
> 
>         NAME(LIST);    # & is optional with parentheses.
>         NAME LIST;     # Parentheses optional if predeclared/imported.
>         &NAME(LIST);   # Circumvent prototypes.
>         &NAME;         # Makes current @_ visible to called subroutine.

Apologies for the over-short question -- I know about the @_ 
difference... it was an oversight that I asked about the wrong thing.. 
the part that I admit that I have _never_ noticed in perlsub was the bit 
about 'inline'...  it seems like an odd [and well hidden :o)] convention 
for handling inline functions: was that done _specifically_ to make the 
'constant' stuff work out right?

  /Bernie\
-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--          

==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl?  Well, if you insist...
==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_
====   unsubscribe