in reply to Re: Re: passing subroutine args as a hash: why not?
in thread passing subroutine args as a hash: why not?

I meant nit as in nitpick, which appears to have an etymology related to lice eggs. (Those little circles in the percent sign are a happy accident.)

I don't understand what you mean by it helps those who come after me know what the subroutine expects. If they're reading the code, why not read the very next line in the function to see exactly how you're dealing with parameters? If they're reading the documentation, you'll have to tell them what to expect anyway.

I'm all for not repeating myself. I just don't see what the function parameter adds.

  • Comment on Re: Re: Re: passing subroutine args as a hash: why not?