Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2013
On Sun Sep 29 04:43:25 2013, LeonT wrote: > On Sun Sep 29 02:26:28 2013, LAWalsh wrote: > > Regardless of documentation that may justify this behavior, I would > > like to > > see the design reasons for this behavior if such is to be found. > > I see no logic in disabling $_, **randomly*** (based on callstack) in > > a sub-function or library call but allowing it for built-ins. ---- > When using $_ in a subroutine and you do not want it to affect or or be > affected by the calling environment, you should use local on it. Or > better yet, just use a lexical variable. Not doing so is a bug, your > bug. Perl is behaving as intended and expected. ---- > Closing this as not-a-bug -==== As I said, referring to current behavior or saying that the current buggy behavior is "by design", doesn't mean it isn't a bug. That you didn't understand that basic premise is typical of one who engages in unthinking behavior in order to close bugs (not that you always do, but *often* do). If you can show what would be harmed by my change, I'll accept it as not being a bug. Otherwise, I assert you've placed a needless restriction on library code -- that all of them must use "local" $_ -- which may be completely inappropriate, especially given that the locality of $_ isn't preserved across lateral transfers of control made with "goto". --- via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: rejected https://rt.perl.org:443/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=120047Thread Previous | Thread Next