Bob Showalter wrote at Wed, 05 Jun 2002 15:30:29 +0200:
>
> 3. Don't use the &foo or &foo(args) calling styles.
>
Allthough I would miss it a little bit.
I find the &foo style useful when implementing a little polymorphic subroutine.
Example:
sub foo {
/NUMERIC/ && &_foo_numeric
or /WORD/ && &_foo_word
or "otherwise" && &_foo_crazy;
}
sub _foo_numeric {
print "Numbers: @_\n";
}
sub _foo_word {
print "Words: @_\n";
}
sub _foo_crazy {
print "Crazy: @_\n";
}
foo(NUMERIC => (4,5,6));
foo(WORD => ("x","y","z"));
foo(BIGJ => ("the greatest"));
It's more practical than writing
_foo_numeric( @_ )
_foo_word ( @_ )
_foo_crazy ( @_ )
in the switch case. (In addition I reduce the redundances).
Allthough, there are better (and slower :-( )
ways to implement polymorphic in a real OO-style,
I often use the upper behaviour in CGI scripts.
Cheerio,
Janek
PS: I hope that won't become a religious dibute of using &foo - style vs foo() style.
All I wanted was to declare that there are some really useful reasons for the &foo
style.
I want to underline Bob in saying: Don't use the &foo style without special reason.
Especially don't use it mixed with the foo() style.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
