in reply to Perl Privvies

I don't recall this caller-based technique to enforce privacy as being used much,

My personal opinion is that most people don't feel they "need" it. This is back to the question of "culture" vs "control". In my inside-out objects talk, I use the analogy of double-yellow lines on the road versus concrete lane barriers. (Apologies to non-US drivers -- I hope the analogy is still clear.)

My point is that Perl isn't really about the second way of doing things. And I suspect that many (most?) Perl programmers are sufficiently happy with the first that at most a simple caller() check is all they deem worthwhile. Anyone who really wants around it is going to find a way and there are diminishing (or even negative) returns in the time required to even try to stop them.

Just for fun, if you really want to bend your brain in the "subterfuge race", don't forget about overriding CORE::GLOBAL::caller() or the "# line 43" trick. (See the very end of perlsyn for the last one.) Even for "private" lexical subs, I bet one could get at them with PadWalker.


Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.