Is %$var dereferencing a Perl hash? - perl

Question

I'm sending a subroutine a hash, and fetching it with my($arg_ref) = #_;
But what exactly is %$arg_ref? Is %$ dereferencing the hash?

Answer 1

$arg_ref is a scalar since it uses the $ sigil. Presumably, it holds a hash reference. So yes, %$arg_ref deferences that hash reference. Another way to write it is %{$arg_ref}. This makes the intent of the code a bit more clear, though more verbose.
To quote from perldata(1):
Scalar values are always named with '$', even when referring
to a scalar that is part of an array or a hash. The '$'
symbol works semantically like the English word "the" in
that it indicates a single value is expected.
$days # the simple scalar value "days"
$days[28] # the 29th element of array #days
$days{'Feb'} # the 'Feb' value from hash %days
$#days # the last index of array #days
So your example would be:
%$arg_ref # hash dereferenced from the value "arg_ref"
my($arg_ref) = #_; grabs the first item in the function's argument stack and places it in a local variable called $arg_ref. The caller is responsible for passing a hash reference. A more canonical way to write that is:
my $arg_ref = shift;
To create a hash reference you could start with a hash:
some_sub(\%hash);
Or you can create it with an anonymous hash reference:
some_sub({pi => 3.14, C => 4}); # Pi is a gross approximation.

Answer 2

Instead of dereferencing the entire hash like that, you can grab individual items with
$arg_ref->{key}

Answer 3

A good brief introduction to references (creating them and using them) in Perl is perldoc perfeftut. You can also read it online (or get it as a pdf). (It talks more about references in complex data structures than in terms of passing in and out of subroutines, but the syntax is the same.)

Answer 4

my %hash = ( fred => 'wilma',
barney => 'betty');
my $hashref = \%hash;
my $freds_wife = $hashref->{fred};
my %hash_copy = %$hash # or %{$hash} as noted above.
Soo, what's the point of the syntax flexibility? Let's try this:
my %flintstones = ( fred => { wife => 'wilma',
kids => ['pebbles'],
pets => ['dino'],
}
barney => { # etc ... }
);
Actually for deep data structures like this it's often more convenient to start with a ref:
my $flintstones = { fred => { wife => 'Wilma',
kids => ['Pebbles'],
pets => ['Dino'],
},
};
OK, so fred gets a new pet, 'Velociraptor'
push #{$flintstones->{fred}->{pets}}, 'Velociraptor';
How many pets does Fred have?
scalar # {flintstones->{fred}->{pets} }
Let's feed them ...
for my $pet ( # {flintstones->{fred}->{pets} } ) {
feed($pet)
}
and so on. The curly-bracket soup can look a bit daunting at first, but it becomes quite easy to deal with them in the end, so long as you're consistent in the way that you deal with them.

Answer 5

Since it's somewhat clear this construct is being used to provide a hash reference as a list of named arguments to a sub it should also be noted that this
sub foo {
my ($arg_ref) = #_;
# do something with $arg_ref->{keys}
}
may be overkill as opposed to just unpacking #_
sub bar {
my ($a, $b, $c) = #_;
return $c / ( $a * $b );
}
Depending on how complex the argument list is.