Since arrays and hashes can only contain scalars in Perl, why do you have to use the $ to tell the interpreter that the value is a scalar when accessing array or hash elemen
The sigil give you the return type of the container. So if something starts with @
, you know that it returns a list. If it starts with $
, it returns a scalar.
Now if there is only an identifier after the sigil (like $foo
or @foo
, then it's a simple variable access. If it's followed by a [
, it is an access on an array, if it's followed by a {
, it's an access on a hash.
# variables
$foo
@foo
# accesses
$stuff{blubb} # accesses %stuff, returns a scalar
@stuff{@list} # accesses %stuff, returns an array
$stuff[blubb] # accesses @stuff, returns a scalar
# (and calls the blubb() function)
@stuff[blubb] # accesses @stuff, returns an array
Some human languages have very similar concepts.
However many programmers found that confusing, so Perl 6 uses an invariant sigil.
In general the Perl 5 compiler wants to know at compile time if something is in list or in scalar context, so without the leading sigil some terms would become ambiguous.
I can think of one way that
$x = myarray[1];
is ambiguous - what if you wanted a array called m?
$x = m[1];
How can you tell that apart from a regex match?
In other words, the syntax is there to help the Perl interpreter, well, interpret!
I've just used
my $x = myarray[1];
in a program and, to my surprise, here's what happened when I ran it:
$ perl foo.pl
Flying Butt Monkeys!
That's because the whole program looks like this:
$ cat foo.pl
#!/usr/bin/env perl
use strict;
use warnings;
sub myarray {
print "Flying Butt Monkeys!\n";
}
my $x = myarray[1];
So myarray calls a subroutine passing it a reference to an anonymous array containing a single element, 1.
That's another reason you need the sigil on an array access.