On Tue, Mar 08, 2005 at 01:55:07AM -0500, Uri Guttman wrote: : why not leave it as $?SUB but it is an object and you use the .name : method?
Uh, yeah. Obviously, 11 pm is still to early in the day for me... : this way you won't clutter the namespace and you can add more : methods like .signature, .returns, etc. In which case $?SUB and &?SUB are probably just different names for the same object, or we just go with &?SUB, and assume people will be able to figure out from the lack of parens that &?SUB.name is not calling the subroutine. Or I suppose we could go with straight $?SUB. Or both. Or one. Or the other. Or both. Or... Larry
