Re: [perl #78634] Conflict in defining constant INIT with INITblocks results in weird errors

* Zefram <zefram@fysh.org> [2010-11-16 23:00]:
> Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote:
> >> use constant INIT => 4;
>
> There's a problem with this line: INIT, as a subroutine name,
> is magic to Perl, and defining a constant in this way actually
> amounts to defining a subroutine.  If you change the name to
> XNIT then nothing funny happens.

It seems to me that `constant` should warn about this (as well
as all the other special names (`BEGIN`, `END`, `CHECK` etc.)).

For some reason I even feel it should maybe die… but since
const subs aren’t likely to have any side effects I can’t find
any reason to back up my gut feeling and it seems to fall under
“give them rope”.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

• [perl #78634] Conflict in defining constant INIT with INIT blocks results in weird errors by Father Chrysostomos via RT
• Re: [perl #78634] Conflict in defining constant INIT with INITblocks results in weird errors by Zefram
• Re: [perl #78634] Conflict in defining constant INIT with INITblocks results in weird errors by Aristotle Pagaltzis