Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines

by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop)
on Jul 18, 2015 at 21:14 UTC ( [id://1135331]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines
in thread Memory efficiency, anonymous vs named's vs local subroutines

I will stick in simple named functions...

Simplicity is always a good goal and a good yardstick for judging your code. But I don't want to discourage you from using anonymous lexical subroutines: they work, and they work the way you think they work! In fact, Dominus wrote a whole book (freely available here — and highly recommended!) that's essentially just a zillion ways to use anonymous lexical subroutines.


Give a man a fish:  <%-(-(-(-<

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1135331]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this?Last hourOther CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (4)
As of 2024-03-29 08:05 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found