in reply to Re^9: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated)
in thread Shouldn't LITERAL references be readonly? (updated)
> I don't understand what of interest that's supposed to show.
The fact that [...] resolves each time to a new AV was used as argument against being literal.
Obviously most "literals" are not treated the way constants are. (with the exception of undef)
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery
In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom