Deborah Ariel Pickett wrote:
While I like the glib "Arrays are variables that hold lists" explanation
that worked so well in Perl5, I think that Perl6 is introducing some
changes to this that make this less true.
Like what?
Well, like the builtin switch statement, which was what I wa
> From: Deborah Ariel Pickett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 11:15:13 +1100 (EST)
>
> In Perl6, where there seems to be even more of a blur between
> compile-time and runtime, I don't think it's always going to be possible
> (i.e., easy) to know where naming an array or providing an
> >While I like the glib "Arrays are variables that hold lists" explanation
> >that worked so well in Perl5, I think that Perl6 is introducing some
> >changes to this that make this less true.
> Like what?
Well, like the builtin switch statement, which was what I was trying to
show in my bad examp
Uri Guttman wrote:
>
> arrays are allocated and lists are on the stack. so arrays
> can have references to them but lists can't.
Apoc 2, RFC 175:
>
> scalar(list(1,2,3));
[...]
> scalar(array(1,2,3));
Which would imply one could take a reference to either.
> can anyone see any changes in p
