The error is in your assumption of how the code is used. The routine I gave doesn't do any validation at all, it just returns a quoted regex which is used elsewhere in the code to properly untaint incoming data:

# $value set to incoming parameter earlier
# $param object initialized earlier
my $valex = $param->valex;
$value =~ /($valex)/;
$param->errors( "Parameter '" . $param->name
    . "' contained invalid data." )
    unless(( defined $1 ) and ( $value eq $1 ));
$param->value( $1 );
[download]

Just for the heck of it I added another test, passing a parameter called 'bart' with a value of 'foo123abc'. I defined 'bart' as an integer and watched this test pass:

is( $valop->value( 'bart' ), 123, 'foo123abc validated correctly' );
[download]

Thanks for the reply, though.

UPDATE: I should note that one of the simplifications I made (not expecting the Spanish Inquisition, as they say) to the code in my original post was changing this line in the module:

    $_ = shift || $self->validator;
[download]

to:

    $_ = shift;
[download]

In the module, &valex serves a dual purpose which I didn't think pertinent to the question I was asking.