greengaroo:

Odd, I find your examples a good case for using the second one. Again, different people will find different things more clear.

When I use hashes, I generally use $$h{foo} in preference to $h->{foo}, primarily because it's easier to type, and I use hashes quite a bit. If I were trying to make it visually distinctive, I'd make the harder to type one be for the less frequently used case. Thus, I'd use something like:

$$hashref{key}->('arg');
[download]

To my eye, that stands out better. (But with my luck, it would blow up, so I'd better whip up a test...)

$ cat t.pl
use strict;
use warnings;

sub p { print "foo(", join(", ", @_), ")\n"; }

my $hr = { key=>\&p };

$$hr{key}->('arg');

$ perl t.pl
foo(arg)
[download]

...roboticus

When your only tool is a hammer, all problems look like your thumb.

I like the second rule in perlref.

Anywhere you'd put an identifier (or chain of identifiers) as part of a variable or subroutine name, you can replace the identifier with a BLOCK returning a reference of the correct type.

Sure, the result is often ugly, but there are no exceptions or special cases. What more could my poor memory want.

Bill

For that particular case, you don't need either the -> or the &{}:

sub x{ say "x got [ @_ ]"; };;

$h{x} = \&x;;

$href = \%h;;

$href->{x}('fred','bill');;
x got [ fred bill ]
[download]