Re^6: Global vs. local?

While the name is weird, if you're using a variable to hold it, you can perfectly call the subroutine through that name. And using weird names is good for named subroutines that get autogenerated by code:

my $subname = '1Button_Click';

*{$subname} = sub { print "Hello World\n"; };

no strict 'refs';
$subname->();
[download]

Comment on Re^6: Global vs. local? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: Global vs. local? by shmem (Chancellor) on May 29, 2009 at 18:04 UTC
And using weird names is good for named subroutines that get autogenerated by code The question is wether it is good to name subroutines autogenerated by code in the symbol table. With a dispatch table hash you can name your subroutines by chunks of jpeg files, nice. But symbol tables are namespaces and their entries good for importing/exporting/localizing. I'd rather expect programmers to adhere to perl principles here. Q: Why do you do that? A: Because I can!	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^7: Global vs. local?
by shmem (Chancellor) on May 29, 2009 at 18:04 UTC

And using weird names is good for named subroutines that get autogenerated by code

The question is wether it is good to name subroutines autogenerated by code in the symbol table. With a dispatch table hash you can name your subroutines by chunks of jpeg files, nice. But symbol tables are namespaces and their entries good for importing/exporting/localizing. I'd rather expect programmers to adhere to perl principles here.

Q: Why do you do that?
A: Because I can!

[reply]