I do mean function-scoped static like in C/C++ ofcourse

btw tachyon, your #1 solution isn't:
perl -le 'my @x = ( \$_, \$_ ); $x[0]=42; print $x[1]'

Read your rules. You don't specify HOW the value of $x[0] is changed :-) vis Create an array @x such that changing $x[0] also sets $x[1] to the same value While assignment is one way to change a value....

@x=(\$_,\$_);
$_=10;
print "\$x[$_] = ${$x[$_]}\n" for 0..$#x;
$_=20;
print "\$x[$_] = ${$x[$_]}\n" for 0..$#x;
__DATA__
$x[0] = 10
$x[1] = 10
$x[0] = 20
$x[1] = 20
[download]

cheers $[

tachyon

s&&rsenoyhcatreve&&&s&n.+t&"$'$`$\"$\&"&ee&&y&srve&&d&&print

Create an array @x such that changing $x[0] ...

@x=(\$_,\$_);
my $initial_value = $x[0];
$_=10;
print "\$x[$_] = ${$x[$_]}\n" for 0..$#x;
die "But \$x[0] did not change.\n" if $x[0] eq $initial_value;
$_=20;
print "\$x[$_] = ${$x[$_]}\n" for 0..$#x;
die "But \$x[0] did not change.\n" if $x[0] eq $initial_value;
[download]

You're really printing the wrong thing.

print "\$x[$_] = ${$x[$_]}\n" for 0..$#x;
                 ^^      ^
LHS is $foo, RHS is $$foo. The output is very misleading.

print "\${\$x[$_]} = ${$x[$_]}\n" for 0..$#x;

LHS is $$foo and RHS is $$foo. But we're interested in $foo.

print "\$x[$_] = $x[$_]\n" for 0..$#x;

LHS is $foo and RHS is $foo. Output is correct and shows that the need
+ed change did not happen.
[download]

You're changing the variable that is refered to by the references in $x[0] and $x[1], but you're not actually changing the value in the container that is named $x[0].

Clearer would be: "so that assigning to $x[0] also changes ...", but as said, we're against sanity.

Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }

You are correct, given the conventional definition of a static variable. But the Original Poster provided us with a test of expert Perl prowess, and went so far as to give us his expert definition of static:

"static variable" means a variable with infinite lifetime...

My solution meets his spec. In a rediculous way, of course... but then again it's a rediculous quiz.



Dave

"If I had my life to live over again, I'd be a plumber." -- Albert Einstein

But the Original Poster provided us with a test of expert Perl prowess, and went so far as to give us his expert definition of static

ok ok I messed up; because I've had questions about what a "static variable" is (not all perl programmers are C programmers) so I added a quick clarification and got it wrong.. nobody's perfect

no need to get sarcastic here

My solution meets his spec. In a rediculous way, of course... but then again it's a rediculous quiz.

true on both points   :-)