I will stick in simple named functions...
Simplicity is always a good goal and a good yardstick for judging your code. But I don't want to discourage you from using anonymous lexical subroutines: they work, and they work the way you think they work! In fact, Dominus wrote a whole book (freely available here — and highly recommended!) that's essentially just a zillion ways to use anonymous lexical subroutines.
Give a man a fish: <%-(-(-(-<
In reply to Re^3: Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines
by AnomalousMonk
in thread Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines
by thanos1983
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |