There's more than one way to do things | |
PerlMonks |
Re^4: Shouldn't references be readonly?by LanX (Saint) |
on Aug 05, 2020 at 21:50 UTC ( [id://11120370]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
> I am considering "literals" as more like constants embedded in the program, I understand your POV ... ... BUT literals with the exception of undef are not constant! Re^2: Shouldn't references be readonly? It's always a new ref, hence constructed. The semantics in JS are 100% the same, and they refer to [] and {} as "literal (object) constructors" And I can't find any definition claiming literals to be constants, I think that was made up in this thread.
Cheers Rolf
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
|
|