From: "Chas. Owens"
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 21:15, John W. Krahn wrote:
> > Kelly Jones wrote:
> >>
> >> I want foo() and bar() to do the same thing. One way to do this:
> >>
> >> sub foo {return bar(@_);}
> >>
> >> Is there a more clever way using \&bar and things like that?
> >
> > $ perl -le
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 21:15, John W. Krahn wrote:
> Kelly Jones wrote:
>>
>> I want foo() and bar() to do the same thing. One way to do this:
>>
>> sub foo {return bar(@_);}
>>
>> Is there a more clever way using \&bar and things like that?
>
> $ perl -le'
> use warnings;
> use strict;
>
> sub b
Kelly Jones wrote:
I want foo() and bar() to do the same thing. One way to do this:
sub foo {return bar(@_);}
Is there a more clever way using \&bar and things like that?
$ perl -le'
use warnings;
use strict;
sub bar { print "in sub bar: @_" }
bar 1, 2, 3;
sub foo { goto &bar }
foo 4, 5,
I want foo() and bar() to do the same thing. One way to do this:
sub foo {return bar(@_);}
Is there a more clever way using \&bar and things like that?
--
We're just a Bunch Of Regular Guys, a collective group that's trying
to understand and assimilate technology. We feel that resistance to
new
