This has the benefit of confining your subroutines to a very small namespace, as opposed to the entire symbol table. You can validate your input (lookup the key before calling it), and thereby provide better diagnostics.my %dispatch = ( test => sub { print "test\n" }, hello => sub { print "hello\n" }, ); my $name = 'test'; $dispatch{$name}->(); $name = 'hello'; $dispatch{$name}->();
In the event I actually want the symbol table (I can't actually recall wanting this, outside of calling methods...) then I tend to prefer can(). It does have caveats: if you're dealing with a class, it will search up the inheritance tree. However, this is usually something I want.
You can similarly check for the function before simply calling it, by checking the return value of can(), which is a subref.my $name = 'test'; __PACKAGE__->can("update_$name")->(); $name = 'hello'; __PACKAGE__->can("update_$name")->(); sub update_test { print "test\n" } sub update_hello { print "hello\n" }
In reply to Re: Dynamically Calling a Subroutine
by Somni
in thread Dynamically Calling a Subroutine
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |