Perl Monk, Perl Meditation | |
PerlMonks |
Re^3: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated)by ikegami (Patriarch) |
on Aug 07, 2020 at 01:03 UTC ( [id://11120442]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
uh, I didn't bring up literals at all. It's an ambiguous word which may or may not include [4,5,6] depending on who you ask. It's useless to talk about literals. You asked why it wasn't like "TEST", 42 and undef, and I told you why. If you want to ask a different question now, fine.
After all the fuss you made about inconsistency when you thought it wasn't consistent, you now want to make it inconsistent? No, assigning a number to a scalar that previously contained a reference is odd, but it shouldn't be an error.
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
|
|