in reply to Main routines, unit tests, and sugar

The problem with that format is that any variable I have in the main routine, like $name above, is in scope for the whole file. If I'd misspelled $name in the argument list to say_hello(), it could have given rise to a hard-to-trace bug.

Put your subroutines first, at the top of the file, and the 'main' code at the bottom.

With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
  • Comment on Re: Main routines, unit tests, and sugar

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Main routines, unit tests, and sugar
by stephen (Priest) on Jun 13, 2013 at 05:57 UTC

    That's another variant that I see often, and of course it works. I don't prefer it because I then need to scroll down to the bottom to understand the rest of the code.

    stephen

[reply]

      Then I just hit ^END and I'm there. (Unless I have a large __DATA__ section, in which case ^F__DATA__ takes me there.)

      The main advantages of subroutines at the top is that it avoids accidental closures and the need for pre-declarations for prototype checking.

      But I realise that it is a personal preference thing.

      With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]

In Section Meditations