comment on

You've been answered already that you should use an anonymous subroutine reference. I just want to tuck in that this is one of the very few cases where it's proper to exploit the behaviour of &$foo;.

Abstracting a block of code in a subroutine into another subroutine makes you not able to use @_ directly--or does it?

If you use the sigil & and no parenthesis in a subroutine call no new @_ will be created. The current @_ will be used. This is not the same as just passing @_ in the subroutine call. shift() and friends inside the called subroutine will effect the caller's @_ since they're the same. Thus, you get almost a macro-like solution.

This means that exploiting this behaviour is perfect for sub subroutine-level code refactoring.

You should never do &$foo; unless you know why and have a good reason. Here, you have a good reason and hopefully know why. :-)

ihb

Read argumentation in its context!

In reply to Re: Is it possible to create a sub exclusive to a sub? (Yes, and rare proper use of &$foo;) by ihb
in thread Is it possible to create a sub exclusive to a sub? by punkish

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


The stupid question is the question not asked
	PerlMonks