That works! I think I did something else though?

Update: I found the example on the disk image DVD from my old machine;

doit \&{ $codeRef };;
[download]

Another way:

sub testit{ print 'hi' }

sub doit (&) { $_[0]->() }

$codeRef = \&testit;
doit { &$codeRef };
[download]

update (after BrowserUk's response below) -

My suggestion adds next to nothing, since wrt to sub stacks, $ref->() is just syntactic sugar for &$ref or vice versa. The notation doit \&{ $subref } seems to be the right thing to do:

#!/usr/bin/perl
use Carp qw(cluck);
sub testit{ cluck 'hi',$/ };; 
sub doit (&) { print $_[0],$/;$_[0]->() };; 
$codeRef = \&testit;;
doit { &$codeRef };
__END__
CODE(0x955737c)
hi
 at coderef.pl line 3
        main::testit called at coderef.pl line 6
        main::__ANON__() called at coderef.pl line 4
        main::doit('CODE(0x955737c)') called at coderef.pl line 6
[download]

#!/usr/bin/perl
use Carp qw(cluck);
sub testit{ cluck 'hi',$/ };; 
sub doit (&) { print $_[0],$/;$_[0]->() };; 
$codeRef = \&testit;;
doit \&{ $codeRef };
__END__
CODE(0x9f4c11c)
hi
 at coderef.pl line 3
        main::testit() called at coderef.pl line 4
        main::doit('CODE(0x9f4c11c)') called at coderef.pl line 6
[download]

hmm it even works when passing parameters 8)

  DB<11> $codeRef= sub { print @_ }
 
  DB<12> sub doit (&) { $_[0]->("para") }
 
  DB<13> doit { &$codeRef }
para
[download]

But one should check about the costs of the extra call level ... maybe not too big.

Cheers Rolf

Yes, but you're effectively making nested subroutine calls that way, which for small subs can mean a 25% to 30% performance hit

---

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

"I'd rather go naked than blow up my ass"