Just another Perl shrine | |
PerlMonks |
Re^5: Local for lexicalsby LanX (Saint) |
on Aug 11, 2009 at 13:18 UTC ( [id://787611]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
or if there were a lex_local that could just be dropped in for lexicals as local can for globals. First of all local is the wrong approach, because local just manipulates already declared pack-vars, so under strict you would be forced to predeclare your variables with "our" (or "my") in the outer scope. (look at first our in the following code) (see update) I would love to have a lexical local in P5 BUT not with the extra magic of declaring missing variables your assuming. What you really want is aliasing like $_[ ] variables do.
I know about *, although it doesn't seem to do much for lexicals, but what do you mean by pack-vars? Aliasing with package-variables
However, I don't know how to improve. some ideas:
Cheers Rolf UPDATE: as JavaFan pointed out here you are not forced to use our with full-qualified varnames, so this works but I don't know if this meets your criteria of being more elegant than using $_[0] += $_[1] and furthermore it's only a pack-var thing, in P5 lex-vars have no namespaces...
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
|
|