Re^9: Is there a problem with using barewords as filehandles ?

«...writing the main code after the subs are declared or putting a block around it.»

You mean something like this I guess:


#!/usr/bin/env perl

use strict;
use warnings;

KARL: {
    nose();
}

sub nose {...;}

__END__
[download]

I wrote my code many years like this and I can’t tell how often I’ve been blamed for it.

«The Crux of the Biscuit is the Apostrophe»

perl -MCrypt::CBC -E 'say Crypt::CBC->new(-key=>'kgb',-cipher=>"Blowfish")->decrypt_hex($ENV{KARL});'Help

Comment on Re^9: Is there a problem with using barewords as filehandles ? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: Is there a problem with using barewords as filehandles ? by LanX (Saint) on Jul 08, 2020 at 22:19 UTC
> You mean something like this I guess: Almost `use strict; use warnings; MAIN: { open my $fh,">","filename"; ... nose(); ... } sub nose {...;}` [download] nose() won't have access to any lexical vars defined inside the main block. > I can’t tell how often I’ve been blamed for it. It's a variation of putting the main code into a main() sub and calling it from the start. I think it's a pattern taken from C and I've seen some monks here advocating it. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply] [d/l]
Re^11: Is there a problem with using barewords as filehandles ? by karlgoethebier (Abbot) on Jul 08, 2020 at 22:51 UTC
Yes. This I meant. Creating a `main()` sub I always considered to be unperlish. The block is the way to go. And to be honest: Sometimes when I was unsure and/or in a hurry I’ve put another block into a block. With the nice «side-effect» of some nice indention. Best regards, Karl «The Crux of the Biscuit is the Apostrophe» `perl -MCrypt::CBC -E 'say Crypt::CBC->new(-key=>'kgb',-cipher=>"Blowfish")->decrypt_hex($ENV{KARL});'`Help	[reply] [d/l] [select]