Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2013
On Tue Jul 30 16:05:09 2013, sprout wrote:
> In short: closures close over variables, not lexical scopes, unless
> string eval is involved. (So one can work around this by including eval
> "" in the sub.)
When did this become true in practice?
It does not match up with what I take to be common definition of closures as enclosing a
complete environment. I agree that PadWalker is letting Perl programmers go beyond the realm
of polite behavior, but let's put that aside.
Why shouldn't this program be able to print 2?
use 5.12.0;
use PadWalker 'peek_my';
my $x = 1;
use Data::Dumper;
my $z = sub {
warn Dumper(peek_my(1));
eval { ${ peek_my(1)->{'$x'} } = 2 }
};
my $w = sub { $z->() };
$w->();
say $x;
What are the practical wins to making closure per-variable instead of per-environment?
--
rjbs
---
via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: rejected
https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=119049
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next