Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2002
At 04:04 PM 7/30/02 +0200, Jenda Krynicky wrote:
> > >The problem with run-time "useit Foo" instead of compile-time "use
> > >Foo" is that the symbols are not exported while compiling, prototypes
> > >not "installed", constants not defined, etc. etc. etc.
> > Well, I guess YMMV... prototypes aren't much use in an OO environment
> > anyway, exports seems to work fine, judging from the testing that I
> > did. Constants may be another problem, let me check up on that...
>
>Even if there's no prototype defined for a function, the fact that
>perl knows about it already IS important. Try to run this:
>
> #perl
> foo 1,2,3;
> sub foo {print join(', ', @_), "\n"};
>
>or this:
>
> #perl
> eval q{
> sub foo {print join(', ', @_), "\n"};
> };
> foo 1,2,3;
>
>I bet you'll see the same problems with "useit Module".
Personally, I find the "foo 1,2,3" syntax very dirty and close to using
bare words without strict. If you write it as "foo( 1,2,3 )", there is no
problem.
It may be unambiguous if the parser knows it's a subroutine, but it is not
unambiguous to the reader of the code (because the subroutine may have been
invisibly exported to that namespace by a module).
In any case, I'll add a note to the documentation that this may be a problem...
Liz