+ $str = 'this has a $fred and $barney in it';
+ $str =~ s/(\$\w+)/$1/eeg; # need double eval
+
+it would be better to keep a hash around like %USER_VARS and have
+variable references actually refer to entries in that hash:
+
+ $str =~ s/\$(\w+)/$USER_VARS{$1}/g; # no /e here at all
+
+That's faster, cleaner, and safer than the previous approach. Of course,
+you don't need to use a dollar sign. You could use your own scheme to
+make it less confusing, like bracketed percent symbols, etc.
+
+ $str = 'this has a %fred% and %barney% in it';
+ $str =~ s/%(\w+)%/$USER_VARS{$1}/g; # no /e here at all
+
+Another reason that folks sometimes think they want a variable to
+contain the name of a variable is because they don't know how to build
+proper data structures using hashes. For example, let's say they
+wanted two hashes in their program: %fred and %barney, and that they
+wanted to use another scalar variable to refer to those by name.
+
+ $name = "fred";
+ $$name{WIFE} = "wilma"; # set %fred
+
+ $name = "barney";
+ $$name{WIFE} = "betty"; # set %barney
+
+This is still a symbolic reference, and is still saddled with the
+problems enumerated above. It would be far better to write:
+
+ $folks{"fred"}{WIFE} = "wilma";
+ $folks{"barney"}{WIFE} = "betty";
+
+And just use a multilevel hash to start with.
+
+The only times that you absolutely I<must> use symbolic references are
+when you really must refer to the symbol table. This may be because it's
+something that can't take a real reference to, such as a format name.
+Doing so may also be important for method calls, since these always go
+through the symbol table for resolution.
+
+In those cases, you would turn off C<strict 'refs'> temporarily so you
+can play around with the symbol table. For example:
+
+ @colors = qw(red blue green yellow orange purple violet);
+ for my $name (@colors) {
+ no strict 'refs'; # renege for the block
+ *$name = sub { "<FONT COLOR='$name'>@_</FONT>" };
+ }
+
+All those functions (red(), blue(), green(), etc.) appear to be separate,
+but the real code in the closure actually was compiled only once.
+
+So, sometimes you might want to use symbolic references to directly
+manipulate the symbol table. This doesn't matter for formats, handles, and
+subroutines, because they are always global--you can't use my() on them.
+For scalars, arrays, and hashes, though--and usually for subroutines--
+you probably only want to use hard references.