On 5 Dec 2001, at 14:09, Eugene van der Pijll wrote: > Bernie Cosell schreef op 05 december 2001: > > Meta-question: since Perl is content to try to *call* '&main::;' is there > > some trickery to *DEFINE* such a subroutine? For example, trying: > > main:: { die; } > > gets you what I would have expected in the '..&' case: a syntax error for a > > missing subroutine name. > > perl -e'*;=sub {1}; print &;' good heavens.. the actual subroutine name is semi-colon?? So the name isn't missing and isn't null, but is ';'. I'm not sure that that doesn't make it MORE confusing to me --- Are there other punctuation marks that work in that context?? Three questions: 1) is semicolon the ONLY puncuation mark that has this odd special-dispensation? 2) WHY does perl allow this --- it still seems like a slam-dunk syntax error situation to me 3) who *discovered* this anomaly? [how does someone even think to TRY something bizarre like this.....] I'm not much of a golf fan but I've certainly learned interesting/amazing things about Perl from the 'holes'. /bernie\ -- Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers mailto:bernie@fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA --> Too many people, too few sheep <--Thread Previous | Thread Next