(With all the caveats of local and symboltable hacking, of course.)Indeed. In fact this is a hack. Granted, a nice hack, but as I wrote, not that it is impossible to work around the lack of lexically scoped named subs, it's possible and even easy. We still simply lack them and I would feel comfortable having them instead. I would just be interested to know whether there's some major technical difficulty in this sense...
In reply to Re^2: Isn't Perl5 ready for C<my sub>?
by blazar
in thread Isn't Perl5 ready for C<my sub>?
by blazar
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |