Ah, you just showed me something cool, that I can do without the 'sub' declaration if I prototype the callback-setter.
But I guess I'm not being very clear as to my primary objective. I would like to have something like the following:
package MyModule;
my $callback;
sub set_callback {
$callback = shift;
}
sub exec_callback {
# the next three lines don't work, but they are indicative of what I
+ would like
# to see happen... i want $name, $street, $city, $zip to be made ava
+ilable as package
# globals to the anonymous callback sub... in other words, I don't w
+ant the callback
# to execute in it's own package, I want it to execute in MyModule::
+ThrowAway
package MyModule::ThrowAway;
our ($name, $street, $city, $zip) = @_;
&$callback();
package MyModule
}
package main;
# set callback to check that name and zip are both correctly formatted
# notice that callback sub assumes that $name and $zip have been set f
+or it, not
# passed in @_
#
MyModule::set_callback(sub { $name =~ /^[a-zA-Z\s]+$/ and $zip /^\d+$/
+ })
MyModule::exec_callback('Bob', '600 1st St.', 'Beverly Hills', 90210);
Now that I think about it, this could never work under
use strict, since $name and $zip are undeclared at the time the callback sub is formed.
update: cleared up a few confusing things in my code