Further to GrandFather's reply: Not only is it difficult to figure out how such code works, even then it probably doesn't work the way you (thanos1983) think it does.

Consider the "Variable "$x" will not stay shared at ..." warning(s) you get when you run such code (you are running your code with warnings enabled, right?):

Variable "%s" will not stay shared
    (W closure) An inner (nested) *named* subroutine is referencing a
    lexical variable defined in an outer named subroutine.

    When the inner subroutine is called, it will see the value of the
    outer subroutine's variable as it was before and during the *first*
    call to the outer subroutine; in this case, after the first call to
    the outer subroutine is complete, the inner and outer subroutines
    will no longer share a common value for the variable. In other
    words, the variable will no longer be shared.

    This problem can usually be solved by making the inner subroutine
    anonymous, using the "sub {}" syntax. When inner anonymous subs that
    reference variables in outer subroutines are created, they are
    automatically rebound to the current values of such variables.
(See perldiag.) Anonymous subroutines allow proper closures to be formed and maintained.

WRT local-ized subroutine names (or anything else, for that matter), remember that a localized thingy is visible within the scope of all subroutines subsequently invoked within the localizing scope. I.e., its localization is dynamic. A lexical variable (e.g., one holding a code reference) is visible only within the scope of the block in which it is defined, i.e., its scope is, well, lexical. To me, lexical scope is much to be prefered over dynamic scope unless you have a very clear (and well documented) reason for choosing the latter.

As to the difference in memory usage between local-ized and lexical subroutines: I must admit I've done no research or experimentation, but I doubt there is any significant difference.

Give a man a fish:  <%-(-(-(-<

In reply to Re: Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines by AnomalousMonk
in thread Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines by thanos1983

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.