in reply to Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ?

What are the use cases of that pattern?

The pattern you are observing is that the package directive controls the package in which code is compiled. sub X::foo { pp(\@_) } is simply not an exception to that. Effort to provide a special behaviour for sub X::foo { pp(\@_) } was not spent.

Put differently, 

sub X::foo { pp(\@_) }

[download]
is short for 
BEGIN { *X::foo = sub { pp(\@_) }; }

[download]
which is effectively what happens every time you import a symbol from a module (e.g. use X qw( foo );).

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ?
by LanX (Saint) on Jul 31, 2020 at 14:32 UTC
    You effectively just repeated what I said without answering my question.

    What are the use-cases where this idiomatic construct is useful?

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    Wikisyntax for the Monastery

[reply]

      I answered that. It's used every time you export something. e.g. use X qw( foo ); It allows foo to find other subs it should find and to use use vars vars it expects to find.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
        Well, I'm asking about use cases for the syntax and you are describing the semantics .

        The exporter will certainly not apply a

        sub X::foo {Block}

        syntax.

        TIMTOWTDI, but in which circumstances would I want to "do it this way"?

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        Wikisyntax for the Monastery

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom