Yes. Next question.Next question: why?
Seriously, what's wrong with a much easier approach like this?
Somebody could mess with the package global $FOO_HAS_BEEN_CALLED and blow things up, and call_me_only_once() gets called twice. Of course, call_me_once() disposing of itself properly after being called would make damn sure it isn't a second time :-)
--shmem
_($_=" "x(1<<5)."?\n".q·/)Oo. G°\ /
/\_¯/(q /
---------------------------- \__(m.====·.(_("always off the crowd"))."·
");sub _{s./.($e="'Itrs `mnsgdq Gdbj O`qkdq")=~y/"-y/#-z/;$e.e && print}
In reply to Re^2: Is modifying the symbol table to redefine subroutines evil?
by shmem
in thread Is modifying the symbol table to redefine subroutines evil?
by tlm
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |