I have to disagree in this generality, closures are a common technique.

I'm confused by this comment, could you show a code example of what you mean?

My understanding of BillKSmith's node is that it is arguing against file-scoped lexicals that are used by multiple subs in the file, and I fully agree with that.

One contrived example, using a private config-val instead of a public package var.

my $config = 42;
my $change_allowed = 0;

sub mult {
  $_[0] * $config 
}

sub get_config {
   $config
}

sub set_config {
   $config = shift if  $change_allowed;
}

# yadda
[download]

of course you could also put only those subs inside an extra block together with the closure var.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the 𐍀𐌴𐍂𐌻 Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery}

of course you could also put only those subs inside an extra block together with the closure var.

Ok, I see what you mean. Personally, I tend to think of closures as something you can make multiple instances of (sub foo { my $x=0; return sub {$x++} }), but if the code you showed was in a block, then I guess that can fit the definition of a closure too, since the subs are then the only thing to hold references to the variables.