Re^2: Array iterator factory (())

Note that &$iter() is just fine (it has none of the problems of &$iter;) and is even better than $iter->() in that it works on fairly old versions of Perl (though enough time has passed since the $iter->() syntax was introduced that few need to worry much about supporting versions of Perl that predate it).

It seems that 'everyone' focuses on the & as being the problem and never mention that ampersand with parens is okay, sometimes even an advantage. Note that the both $iter->() and &$iter() ignore prototypes (since such are only enforced at compile time, a time during which perl doesn't know what function $iter might point to) and neither can be used directly with built-in functions so not even the difference between func() and &func() apply between &$iter() and $iter->().

(tye)Re: A question of style covers much of & and () and calling subroutines.

- tye

Comment on Re^2: Array iterator factory (()) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: Array iterator factory (())
by ihb (Deacon) on Mar 17, 2005 at 19:12 UTC

It seems that 'everyone' focuses on the & as being the problem and never mention that ampersand with parens is okay, sometimes even an advantage.

Because I've repeatedly pointed out the issue with &foo; I take the easy way in my replies and don't mention &foo() as the alternative. Instead of elaborating on the same issue once again I'll quote myself. From Re: Hash values and constants:

I intentionally avoided mentioning & as a way of disambiguate the constant. This is because it will confuse and mislead people to think that you can do &foo; instead of foo(), which isn't the case.

Re: Re: Forward-referenceing subs

For some reason, it's much more common to drop the parenthesis when dereferencing than when making a regular subroutine call.

$foo->()

&$foo;

ihb

See perltoc if you don't know which perldoc to read!

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]


Come for the quick hacks, stay for the epiphanies.
	PerlMonks