Sure you could, but I wouldn't bother tying it at this point. You have to have one globally accessible symbol by which to reach this connection. Either it happens explicitly through &::dbh() or implicitly through tied $::dbh. I'd generally prefer to leave off with the tying to avoid excessive cuteness. | [reply] |
*shrug*. I don't think the purpose of the tie here is cuteness, but to actually separate the initialization details from the code. (Also, I'm not using globals, but package-scoped lexicals declared with my). I guess I could write a module that supported either interface (tied or functional). Hell, most of the code for both cases is already written in this very thread!
| [reply] |
