You raise a valid point and I'm definitely not "complaining" about anything. Like you, I "usually advise against" that usage.

My intention was to point out, quite unequivocally, that there was a difference between

&sub(@args)
[download]

and

sub(@args)
[download]

Reviewing what I originally wrote, it's perhaps not immediately obvious that, without a valid reason for writing

&sub(@args)
[download]

it would generally be preferable to write

sub(@args)
[download]

Thankyou for raising this point and providing an opportunity for clarification.

Edit: yep see Re: What is the point of the & sigil for function refs?

Well, it can bypass prototype checks, though in this case the sub has no prototype.

Right, I was answering the general question if &ersand makes a difference.

This thread drift isn't really relevant for the OP.

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)
Je suis Charlie!}