Quickly finding a quarantined message - was: RE:[Mimedefang]action_discard

[Kevin A. McGrail]

I have personally had this bite me but perhaps it is simply because I always use & to indicate a function call.  As you stated, dropping the & does change the behavior.

The following snippet prints just once for me when most programmers would expect it not to print at all.

&test("testing should not print");

sub test {
  my ($test) = @_;

  &test2;
  &test2();
}

sub test2 {
  my ($test2) = @_;

  print $test2;
}

In any case, I would still recommend the () but only because I also recommend the &.  Thanks for the tip though.  It's one of the reasons I like this list.

Regards,
KAM

On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 11:26:38PM +0200, Jan-Pieter Cornet wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 04:00:39PM -0400, Cormack, Ken wrote:
> > > Great idea!  One enhancement is I think you might want to call it as 
> > > get_quarantine_dir() otherwise I think perl will pass @_ from your current
> > > scope.  Currently, the function takes no params but who knows next week...
> 
> Err... this is not true. While get_quarantine_dir(); is preferred over
> get_quarantine_dir; they both mean exactly the same: call the function
> with an empty argument list. Using brackets just makes it clearer to
> the read that it's a function call.
> 
> If you want to pass the current arguments in @_, you'll have to
> explicitly call it as &get_quarantine_dir; (note: no brackets).
> 
> See:
>     perldoc -q '&foo'
>     man perlsub