|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
On Mon, Jul 10, 2000 at 04:22:47PM -0400, Robert Spier wrote:
> >>>>> "MCT" == Michael C Toren <mct@netaxs.com> writes:
>
> >> Can you provide us an example of what you haven't seen? I use
> >> references a lot, mostly implicitly. I don't know what \VARIABLE
> >> is supposed to represent.
> MCT> I believe he's referring to something like:
> MCT> $foo = "xyzzy"; $bar = \$foo;
> MCT> $bar is then a reference to $foo.
>
> In that case, the answer is relatively easy.
>
> That's poor perl programming.
>
> You never (with a 99.9952334% probability) will ever need to do that.
>
> It is a) bug prone
> b) often a security hole
> c) better solved with a hash or an array
>
> The reason the syntax exists is buried somewhere in perl4 or earlier.
> (And perl rarely removes things from the langauge.)
What are you talking about? Why is it error phrone, a security hole
or better solved with a hash or an array?
If you think soft-references are being used in the above code, think
again. \ creates a hard reference, and is strict safe. I can't see
any security holes here, nor do I see how it's better solved with
a hash or an array. As for bug phrone, I disagree. Perhaps you could
show a better method?
I don't understand your reference (no pun intended) to perl4. Perl4
did not have references.
Abigail
**Majordomo list services provided by PANIX <URL:http://www.panix.com>**
**To Unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe phl" to majordomo@lists.pm.org**
|
|