Brent Dax wrote:
> What I'm suggesting is that, instead of the padlist's AV containing
> arrays, it should contain stashes, otherwise indistinguishable from
> the ones used for global variables.
Lexicals are fundamentally different from Perl's package (dynamically
scoped) variables. Even if you could somehow hack package variables
to implement lexicals, it would waste space duplicating a symbol table
for each instance of a lexical scope.
> The simple way to emulate this is to make sure that no subroutine
> can see another's MY:: stash.
Right. Sounds a lot like a pad to me -- each instance of a scope (sub)
gets its' own copy of the variables. (By instance I mean activation
record, not the symbol table definition.)
> There is a possible caveat with inner blocks--how does an outer block
> get, er, blocked from accessing an inner block's my() variables?
> However, I think this isn't really that big a problem, and can easily be
> solved with properties:
You don't understand lexically scoped variables. There isn't
any run-time name lookup on a variable -- the compiler resolves all
access to a specific memory location (or offset). All your fancy
symbol table flag twiddling is slow, unreliable and unnecessary.
- Ken
