On Wed, Aug 16, 2000 at 08:40:18AM -0700, Nathan Wiger wrote: > See, I don't see it as that big a deal, especially not if lvalue and > rvalue subs work identically. Hrm. Perhaps you aren't explaining yourself clearly. Let's pretend that there is a magical value called $LVALUE that contains the thing being assigned. Are you saying that in somesub = $value; the subroutine C<somesub>, being lvaluable by default is free to use or ignore $LVALUE? If so, how does one detect errors? When C<somesub> is ignoring $LVALUE the above would silently fail, yes? -Scott -- Jonathan Scott Duff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Re: RFC 107 (v1) lvalue subs should receive the rvalue... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 107 (v1) lvalue subs should receive the rvalue... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 107 (v1) lvalue subs should receive the r... Nathan Wiger
- Re: RFC 107 (v1) lvalue subs should receive t... Nathan Torkington
- Make lvalue subs the default (was Re: RFC... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default (was... Piers Cawley
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Andy Wardley
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default (was... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Jonathan Scott Duff
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Torkington
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... James Mastros
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default (was... Nathan Torkington
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Torkington
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Graham Barr
- Re: Make lvalue subs the default... Chaim Frenkel