Re^3: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?


P is for Practical
	PerlMonks

Re^3: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?

by jwkrahn (Abbot)

on Oct 14, 2009 at 22:12 UTC ( [id://801224]=note: print w/replies, xml )

Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?
in thread Defining a sub within a sub: OK?

Subroutine names are package variables and therefore not "globally scoped". Only certain Perl variables fit the definition of "globally scoped".

the sub level1 is defined within an explicit scope, not within a code block.

Basic BLOCKs

Comment on Re^3: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?
by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Oct 14, 2009 at 22:50 UTC

I agree with jwkrahn's point about the 'code block' (as defined in the referenced discussion of blocks). What I thought was meant was a 'code block' of the sort associated with sort and other such built-ins, e.g.,
my @sorted = sort { $a <=> $b } @unsorted;

(Hang on, I may be experiencing a 'lobe block' ... )

[reply]
[d/l]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom