http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=986939


in reply to Re: Perl Elitist Code vs Functional Code
in thread Perl Elitist Code vs Functional Code

Don't constantly retype boilerplate code. Wrap it in reusable functions. Here's an example for your status/error messages...

package MyProject::Sugar::Catalyst; use Sub::Exporter -setup => { exports => [ error_msg => \&_build_error_message, ], groups => { default => [qw/ error_msg /], }, }; sub _build_error_message { my ($class, $name, $def) = @_; return sub { my ($c, %arg) = @_; my $uri = $arg{uri} || $def->{uri} or die "No URI supplied"; my $msg = $arg{msg} || $def->{msg} || 'Oh noes, ANOTHER FUCKING ERROR!!!'; $c->res->redirect( $c->uri_for($uri, { mid => $c->set_error_msg($msg) }) ); $c->detach(); } }

An example of usage:

package MyProject::Controller::Foobar; use MyProject::Sugar::Catalyst db_error_msg => { msg => "Database Error!" }, http_error_msg => { msg => "HTTP Error!" }, error_msg => { }; ...; sub foo_bar { ...; db_error_msg($c, uri => $uri); } sub foo_baz { ...; db_error_msg($c, uri => $uri, msg => "specific error message"); }

It makes things easier in the long run.

perl -E'sub Monkey::do{say$_,for@_,do{($monkey=[caller(0)]->[3])=~s{::}{ }and$monkey}}"Monkey say"->Monkey::do'

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Perl Elitist Code vs Functional Code
by Anonymous Monk on Aug 13, 2012 at 01:46 UTC

      Yes, closures are how Sub::Exporter works. Moose uses Sub::Exporter under the hood to export its has, extends, etc keywords. has, extends, etc are all closures. Catalyst is Moose-based. You use Catalyst; you're using closures.

      Catalyst is Plack-based. Plack is an implementation of the PSGI spec. Under PSGI all web apps are closures. You use Catalyst; you're using closures.

      perl -E'sub Monkey::do{say$_,for@_,do{($monkey=[caller(0)]->[3])=~s{::}{ }and$monkey}}"Monkey say"->Monkey::do'