note
hardburn
<code>
print $a+@b; #coerce array into number
</code>
<P>This is exactly the same as <code>array.length()</code> in Java. It's not a type conversion.</p>
<code>
print $a+$ref_b; #coerce reference into number
</code>
<p>Those are both scalars. Not a type conversion.</p>
<code>
my $d=eval %c; #coerce hash into string
</code>
<p>This one is tricky. What the eval actually gets is certain internal information concerning the hash, which happens to be output as a valid perl expression (a division operation). You've lost all real information about the hash, and therefore is not a type conversion.</p>
<code>
my @e=%c;print "@e"; #hashes and arrays are different types. Oh wait
</code>
<p>My own view on this is that hashes and arrays are both subtypes of lists. So it's not so much a conversion between different types than between different subtypes. There are those that disagree, though.</p>
<code>
my @t=12; #coerce number into array
</code>
<p>This simply makes a scalar containing 12 that is placed as the first element of the list, and the list is then assigned to an array. The scalar is still there, so it's not a type conversion.</p>
<p>I think I've established a pattern here. None of these are really type conversions.</p>
<!-- Node text goes above. Div tags should contain sig only -->
<div class="pmsig"><div class="pmsig-195718">
<p>"There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, <i>Myst: The Book of D'ni</i>.</p>
</div></div>
414713
414770