HTTP/2 200 cache-control: max-age=43200 server: Combust/Plack (Perl) vary: Accept-Encoding content-encoding: gzip content-length: 2191 content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 last-modified: Sat, 11 Oct 2025 15:47:21 GMT traceparent: 1070127ea6abfd1ca3fcde32344c8bb0 strict-transport-security: max-age=15768000 Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from July 2008

strictly no indirect object syntax?

Thread Previous | Thread Next

This morning I committed this bit of code:
    confess "Invalid server tier '$tier'" unless defiend $file;
It's valid under use strict, and we know that our test coverage isn't
perfect...
My colleague asked "what is this "defiend" function?  Is it new in Perl6?"
I suggested "maybe it removes Damians"
  (https://www.perlmonks.org/index.pl?node_id=107600)
Of course, it's valid because it's indirect object syntax:
$ perl -MO=Deparse
use strict;
use Carp;
my ($tier, $file);
confess "Invalid server tier '$tier'" unless defiend $file;
__END__
use Carp;
use strict 'refs';
my($tier, $file);
confess("Invalid server tier '${tier}'") unless $file->defiend;
__DATA__
- syntax OK
Would it be viable to add a feature to the parser to outlaw invalid object
syntax? I'm not convinced that it should go on use strict as a new stricture.
Nicholas Clark

Thread Previous | Thread Next

• strictly no indirect object syntax? by Nicholas Clark
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Gabor Szabo
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Nicholas Clark
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Bram
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by chromatic
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Gabor Szabo
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Bram
• RE: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Jan Dubois
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Abigail
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Eric Wilhelm
• RE: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Jan Dubois
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Aristotle Pagaltzis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Rick Delaney
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Aristotle Pagaltzis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Reini Urban
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Jonathan Rockway
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ben Morrow
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Aristotle Pagaltzis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ben Morrow
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Alexandr Ciornii
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Abigail
• RE: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Jan Dubois
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by H.Merijn Brand
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Yuval Kogman
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Reini Urban
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ed Avis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by merlyn
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ed Avis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Abigail
• RE: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ed Avis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Jesse Vincent
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by chromatic
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Elliot Shank
• RE: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ed Avis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Abigail
• RE: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ed Avis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Reini Urban
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by David Nicol
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by H.Merijn Brand
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Glenn Linderman
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Paul Fenwick
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Aristotle Pagaltzis
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Bram
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Bram
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Ben Morrow
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Dr.Ruud
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by David Golden
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Yuval Kogman
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Tom Christiansen
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by demerphq