|
|
|
good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
| PerlMonks |
Re: improve ugly flow controlby dragonchild (Archbishop) |
| on Sep 19, 2004 at 10:12 UTC ( [id://392185]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
This is an archived low-energy page for bots and other anonmyous visitors. Please sign up if you are a human and want to interact.
If something feels redundant, that's probably a good reason to look at putting it in a subroutine. I would do something like this:
(Yes, I am really returning undef and die'ing with no string. The key is die/not-die, determining whether or not to trigger the if ($@) { ... } block.) The really neat thing about this method is that you can handle multiple sets of options in the same eval, so long as they all use the same algorithm.
Note: This will do_something1() for the first set before handling the second set, and so forth. The description you give implies that this should be the case, but it's explicit here. ------
Then there are Damian modules.... *sigh* ... that's not about being less-lazy -- that's about being on some really good drugs -- you know, there is no spoon. - flyingmoose I shouldn't have to say this, but any code, unless otherwise stated, is untested
In Section
Seekers of Perl Wisdom
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||