Re^2: RFC: New style for argument check in subs

As I already said, accepting undef as valid argument is such a special and rare case that it should be covered by another approach. (see footnotes in OP)

Here using ternaries is far more explicit and shows that a special argument undef is accepted.

my $a = exists $arg{a} ? $arg{a} : 'else case';

But I agree that it's better to name the error die('Undefined argument!') instead of 'Missing argument' to avoid such misunderstandings.

Cheers Rolf

Comment on Re^2: RFC: New style for argument check in subs Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: RFC: New style for argument check in subs by Tux (Canon) on Sep 05, 2012 at 15:05 UTC
Not rare at all! Both as unnamed and as named parameter used in DBI + DBD::CSV: `use DBI; my $dbh = DBI->connect ( "dbi:CSV", # Unnamed, driver undef, # Unnamed, username undef, # Unnamed, password { f_ext => ".csv/r", # Named and defined f_schema => undef, # Named and undefined });` [download] FWIW all `NULL` values in a database are refered to through `undef`, so you'll see a lot of those in both named and unnamed arguments to functions and methods. Enjoy, Have FUN! H.Merijn	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: RFC: New style for argument check in subs by LanX (Saint) on Sep 05, 2012 at 15:30 UTC
Good point. But in those cases checks for existence should be explicit. UPDATE: You convinced me that *** Unpack Named First is a danegrous option. Thanks :) Cheers Rolf	[reply]