I guess, I can't understand what is the meaning of "explanation for the syntax". I know that there's syntax for doing different things. I don't understand why the syntax has to be explained. I mean, it is not common to search for the explanation of syntax of English language. The syntax (together with words) makes English different from say Russian :)
I guess for now I'll just have to go with *color and *{"color"} are equivalent--even though *{"color"} is not legal under strict refs.
"strict refs" just tries to limit you to the rigid forms of "normal" usage. This is done in hope to catch some obscure errors. It does not change the fact, that *color and *{"color"} do the same thing. Though with the second syntax you can do more obscure things than with the first (that is why "strict" does not approve it :) ) Well, as long as your understanding does not limit you in what you can do with perl, there shouldn't be any problems.
-
Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
-
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big>
<blockquote> <br /> <dd>
<dl> <dt> <em> <font>
<h1> <h2> <h3> <h4>
<h5> <h6> <hr /> <i>
<li> <nbsp> <ol> <p>
<small> <strike> <strong>
<sub> <sup> <table>
<td> <th> <tr> <tt>
<u> <ul>
-
Snippets of code should be wrapped in
<code> tags not
<pre> tags. In fact, <pre>
tags should generally be avoided. If they must
be used, extreme care should be
taken to ensure that their contents do not
have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent
horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor
intervention).
-
Want more info? How to link
or How to display code and escape characters
are good places to start.
|
