HTTP/2 200 cache-control: max-age=43200 server: Combust/Plack (Perl) vary: Accept-Encoding content-encoding: gzip content-length: 2564 content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 last-modified: Sun, 12 Oct 2025 00:28:30 GMT traceparent: 41f5dd2819bbaa7abf97b8504aeb56de strict-transport-security: max-age=15768000 Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from July 2008

Re: strictly no indirect object syntax?

On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 11:01:29 +0100, Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org> wrote:
> This morning I committed this bit of code:
> 
>     confess "Invalid server tier '$tier'" unless defiend $file;
Of course we should have kept 'err', than this would not have happened
	$file err confess "Invalid server tier '$tier'";
> 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?
karuda has to be better in /something/. Personally I would love to
see indirect object notation die completely, but that would break
too much.
> I'm not convinced that it should go on use strict as a new stricture.
-- 
H.Merijn Brand          Amsterdam Perl Mongers  https://amsterdam.pm.org/
using & porting perl 5.6.2, 5.8.x, 5.10.x, 5.11.x on HP-UX 10.20, 11.00,
11.11, 11.23, and 11.31, SuSE 10.1, 10.2, and 10.3, AIX 5.2, and Cygwin.
https://mirrors.develooper.com/hpux/           https://www.test-smoke.org/
https://qa.perl.org      https://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/

• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by Tom Christiansen
• Re: strictly no indirect object syntax? by demerphq
• 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