There's more than one way to do things | |
PerlMonks |
Re: Re: Is this a symbolic reference?by danger (Priest) |
on Jan 16, 2002 at 23:39 UTC ( [id://139303]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
The short version is that strict refs only applies to $%@* things, not &. Your short version seems to be a little too short perhaps:
There clearly appears to be an exception for goto &{"symref"} in terms of symbolic-ref style *calls*. The report you gave was slightly different --- taking a reference to a symbolically dereferenced subroutine works:
The symbolic-deref for the purpose of taking a ref does indeed appear to be an exception that applies to & but not $%@*:
In Section
Meditations
|
|