>>>>> "B" == Ben Tilly <ben_tilly / hotmail.com> writes:

B> I should follow up by noting that it is unwise to plan
B> on there being another foo in scope. :-)

 I've not understood, do you want to make reference to the perl construct ?

   my $m = 12;
   sub toto {
      my $m = 24;
   }

B> It isn't that complex.  You just created a series of
B> variables named a and b while printing, and then you
B> backed out of the stack and it reversed.  The only

 It's perhaps not complex for you, because you came with a perl
 background :-) 

B> exception to that pattern is that when you assigned
B> to a by using it as an argumet in the middle of the
B> script, you didn't create another variable.  So
B> there is a slight asymmetry.

 but this case will exist.


Guy Decoux