Re: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ?

What are the use cases of that pattern?

The pattern you are observing is that the package directive controls the package in which code is compiled. sub X::foo { pp(\@_) } is simply not an exception to that. Effort to provide a special behaviour for sub X::foo { pp(\@_) } was not spent.

Put differently,

sub X::foo { pp(\@_) }
[download]

is short for

BEGIN { *X::foo = sub { pp(\@_) }; }
[download]

which is effectively what happens every time you import a symbol from a module (e.g. use X qw( foo );).

Comment on Re: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ? by LanX (Saint) on Jul 31, 2020 at 14:32 UTC
You effectively just repeated what I said without answering my question. What are the use-cases where this idiomatic construct is useful? Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply]
Re^3: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 01, 2020 at 06:38 UTC
I answered that. It's used every time you export something. e.g. `use X qw( foo );` It allows `foo` to find other subs it should find and to use `use vars` vars it expects to find.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ? by LanX (Saint) on Aug 01, 2020 at 08:38 UTC
Well, I'm asking about use cases for the syntax and you are describing the semantics . The exporter will certainly not apply a `sub X::foo {Block}` syntax. TIMTOWTDI, but in which circumstances would I want to "do it this way"? Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery}	[reply] [d/l]
Re^5: Use cases for 'sub Pckg::func { }' ? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Aug 01, 2020 at 16:28 UTC


Keep It Simple, Stupid
	PerlMonks