Re^4: Removing CODE slot in typeglob / Reversing "use subs ...;"

It's the $false playing tricks again.

$::{FOO} is the typeglob for FOO in main, and a typeglob can be dereferenced as a hash, and that's exactly what $::{FOO}{CODE} does. It becomes more clear if you add the arrow: $::{FOO}->{CODE}. The reason it works without the arrow is that $::{FOO} is an element of the %:: hash, so it's no different than $foo{bar}{baz}.

use 5.010;

our %FOO = (CODE => 'hash value');
say $::{FOO}{CODE};

__END__
hash value
[download]

lodin

Comment on Re^4: Removing CODE slot in typeglob / Reversing "use subs ...;" Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Removing CODE slot in typeglob / Reversing "use subs ...;" by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jan 03, 2008 at 19:13 UTC
It's the $false playing tricks again. Yeah. Evaling a conditional on an undefined variable in the absence of strict, is a weird way to test if something is allowed under strict. Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. "Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."	[reply]
Re^6: Removing CODE slot in typeglob / Reversing "use subs ...;" by lodin (Hermit) on Jan 03, 2008 at 19:24 UTC
Doh! I'm so used to strict I didn't even think about that it's strict that makes barewords fatal. The root node is updated to have a (hopefully) correct test. No code is too short for `strict` ... lodin	[reply] [d/l]


Think about Loose Coupling
	PerlMonks