Re^3: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated)

in reply to Re^2: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated)
in thread Shouldn't LITERAL references be readonly? (updated)

The whole discussion about "literals" is unfortunately only distracting

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.

map { ++$_ } [1,2,3] should throw an error

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.

Comment on Re^3: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 07, 2020 at 01:19 UTC
Ok, I'd like to contradict myself. I'd actually be ok with making "unassigned" scalars read-only. That includes `[...]`, `$x.$y`, `<>`, etc. It might have performance implications, but they should be extremely tiny. It would break some code (such as `my @lines = map { chomp; } <>;`), but I think the benefits might be larger.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated) by LanX (Sage) on Aug 07, 2020 at 10:34 UTC
> It would break some code I think if it comes to simple scalar types like strings this would result in a migration nightmare. Hence I wouldn't include the cases like `$x.$y, <>, etc` at least by default. Refs on the other hand should be immutable, because the result is always junk. But I doubt we have the resources to implement that anyway. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply] [d/l]
Re^6: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 07, 2020 at 19:54 UTC
`@a = map { $_ = 3; } [];` [download] is no more or less junk than `@a = map { $_ = 3; } $x.$y;` [download] Are you therefore talking about `[] + 1`? Making the reference read-only is not going to catch that.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^7: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated) by LanX (Sage) on Aug 08, 2020 at 01:17 UTC
Re^8: Shouldn't references be readonly? (updated) by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 09, 2020 at 06:55 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom