Oh. Maybe im confused here. I thought that PadWalker wasn't suitable since @_ isnt a lexical. Maybe i havent read this thread closely enough (probably). And since I assumed that the PadWalker bit wasnt suitable it seemed likely you mean the caller() solution.

As for the differences between the caller() implementation they are basically trivial. They all use the idea of using caller inside of the package DB. I lexically scope that package declaration, the other idea adds a subroutine to the DB namespace to make it "easier". Personally I like mine more... But im clearly biased. :-)

BTW if you want a good snippet for seeing how to use caller like this (the one i learned all this from) have a look in Carp::Heavy

Good luck.

--- demerphq
my friends call me, usually because I'm late....