Related articles |
---|
[7 earlier articles] |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! adam@tucson.princeton.edu (1994-09-26) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! adrian@platon.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk (1994-09-23) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! avg@sprintlink.net (1994-09-25) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! hbaker@netcom.com (1994-09-26) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! sasghm@unx.sas.com (1994-09-27) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! iwm@doc.ic.ac.uk (1994-09-29) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! lwall@netlabs.com (1994-10-04) |
Re: Languages From Hell -- your favorite one could walk again! Mike.Stok@meiko.concord.ma.us (1994-10-05) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | lwall@netlabs.com (Larry Wall) |
Keywords: | design, interpreter |
Organization: | NetLabs, Inc. |
References: | 94-09-076 94-09-182 |
Date: | Tue, 4 Oct 1994 00:20:30 GMT |
iwm@doc.ic.ac.uk writes:
: perl:
:
: Version 4 anyway: the way in which assigning a parameter in a subroutine
: to a local variable changes the way the parameter is passed from reference
: to value. I cannot think of a simple way to compile a language where the
: passing method cannot be determined until runtime
I think you've misunderstood. The parameters are always passed by
reference, and arrive in the form of an array--a concept that already
exists elsewhere in Perl. The customary assignment of these parameters
to a list of named variables merely does the copy that would have had
to be done anyway to get pass-by-value semantics, but without adding
any special syntax. This is usually called orthogonality. Believe
it or not, Perl is occasionally orthogonal. :-)
Larry Wall
lwall@netlabs.com
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.