Re^3: strict and symbolic subroutine refs

I sounded a bit pedantic, I regret to admit.

What I really meant was that even if no strict is unnecessary, it might be a good idea to put it there so the code is more self documenting, or to use a solution that doesn't need no strict (is that a double negative?), not because it is a better solution, but because it might be more coherent. The code refs in hash was just an example, I guess.

-nuffin
zz zZ Z Z #!perl

Comment on Re^3: strict and symbolic subroutine refs Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: strict and symbolic subroutine refs by tinita (Parson) on Jul 25, 2004 at 09:49 UTC
I sounded a bit pedantic, I regret to admit. no no, i think it's absolutely right to suggest an alternative like coderefs in a hash whenever such a question arises. those who don't know what kind of problems `&{'subname'}` can bring with it will appreciate it. i still wish i head read the docs more carefully before asking and then reading it ten minutes after, but, interesting, after asking around it turns out that i'm not the only one who missed that strict-exception. =)	[reply] [d/l]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: strict and symbolic subroutine refs
by tinita (Parson) on Jul 25, 2004 at 09:49 UTC

I sounded a bit pedantic, I regret to admit.

&{'subname'}

i still wish i head read the docs more carefully before asking and then reading it ten minutes after, but, interesting, after asking around it turns out that i'm not the only one who missed that strict-exception. =)

[reply]
[d/l]