Re: DBI, $dbh, and subroutinesby LanX (Canon)
|on Jul 12, 2009 at 03:57 UTC||Need Help??|
I'm an advocate of DRY, passing it around increases the error probability , e.g. typos.
OTOH globals tend to have a problem, if the line distance between creation and usage gets to big, or generally if scope and context are not easy to oversee.
I'd use a block scope to simulate an object², the "global" is used like a class-attribute.
Closures are in most simple cases more elegant than objects, especially in perl¹!
(they just can't inherit, but that's not a "simple" case anymore).
(¹) just compare to grandfathers lightweight object! No blessing, no $self ...
(²) "encapsulation" to be more precise