On Tue, 08 Aug 2000 13:03:16 +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: >If you mean that you MUST use "sub", I object. If you mean that the >"sub" may not be used, I agree. Addendum. I would propose that BEGIN { ... } would be what it is now, and that sub BEGIN { ... } would be just a plain user defined sub. That's what it looks like to ordinary users unfamiliar with Perl's current behaviour, IMO. -- Bart.
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*>... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to util... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... John Porter
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to util... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to ... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as the ... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*>... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as the ... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as the ... skud
- RE: RFC 59 (v1) Proposal to utilize C<*> as the ... Brust, Corwin