Would it be possible to change the values of the returns from the subs if the subs approach is used.
Yes, by doing some tricks with the symbol table:
use My::Config; no strict 'refs'; *'My::Config::DB_NAME' = sub { 'new_db' };
Are there any other factors that should be considered when making the choice.
Under certain conditions, subs declared with a prototype of () are considered for inlining (that's how use constant is implemented), which would make the sub method as fast as a hard-coded value. This is true as long as you don't call the sub as a class method. Example (which is tested on perl 5.8.0):
$ perl -MO=Deparse -e ' > package Foo; > sub bar () { "baz" } > package main; > print Foo::bar(), "\n"; > print Foo->bar(), "\n"; > ' -e syntax OK print 'baz', "\n"; print 'Foo'->bar, "\n";
----
I wanted to explore how Perl's closures can be manipulated, and ended up creating an object system by accident.
-- Schemer
Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated
In reply to Re: Variables versus Subroutines for a Configuration Module.
by hardburn
in thread Variables versus Subroutines for a Configuration Module.
by EvdB
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |