Yeah, there's a much better and cheaper way - don't name them, name the indices into @_ via constant
subs, if you need names instead of numbers for sake of code clarity:
sub FOO () { 0 }
sub BAR () { 1 }
sub routine {
my $bar = $_[BAR];
$bar += munge( $_[FOO] );
}
But it is crucial for that discussion to identify when it is beneficial to use named parameters,
and why. I can think of:
- frameworks - you write code that gets called, and there's a convention for what each call brings along. POE is a good example
- looking up a subroutine or method - you want to make use of some subroutines you use seldom, and a quick glance should suffice to know what it needs
- myriads of options - but mostly you need just a few of them. Tk is a good example for that
All other reasons seem to be based on gusto. But then, in early perl OO, objects were mostly blessed
hashrefs (tutorials and perl pods are full of them), and much unreflected use of named parameters stems
from there, I guess.
--shmem
_($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo. G°\ /
/\_¯/(q /
---------------------------- \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}
-
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.
|