http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=647768


in reply to Re^2: OO-call bug uncovered & autovivified functions: defined? exists?
in thread OO-call bug uncovered & autovivified functions: defined? exists?

Consider, you take a reference to \&foo in one part of your code. No symbol table entry is created, but somehow taking the reference Just Works. Later in the same code another reference is taken, \&foo. If no symbol table entry is created, how can these two references refer to the same subroutine?

There has to be some agreement on what underlying subroutine these two references refer to. This has to agree with the subroutine body that, supposedly, is eventually created.