You're almost there.
# MAIN unless ($result = my_sub() ) { # Now you use $result if it's not 0 } # WRAPPER function sub my_sub { eval { _my_sub(@_) }; if ($@) { return $@; } else { return ''; } } # Actual worker... sub _my_sub { # Do your stuff here. If something fails, do a die with a useful error + message. Otherwise, return 0. # For example ... die "Bad data passed in.\n"; }
You actually do a die which doesn't end your script - it gets trapped by the eval and the string you passed die will be put in $@.

Now, I personally dislike this type of error-handling because 0 is FALSE and non-zero is TRUE. Thus, you have to flip your thinking the way the C libs force you to and say you're calling the function and hope it "fails" for success. (Sorta like a drug screening ...)

Instead, I would something similar. Instead of passing back '' for success, I'd pass back undef instead.

# MAIN if (defined ($error = my_sub()) ) { # Now you use $error if it's defined } # WRAPPER function sub my_sub { eval { _my_sub(@_) }; if ($@) { return $@; } else { return undef; } } # Actual worker... sub _my_sub { # Do your stuff here. If something fails, do a die with a useful error + message. Otherwise, return 0. # For example ... die "Bad data passed in.\n"; }
It seems like a semantic difference, but now your code use TRUE and FALSE the way they intuitively used, to indicate success and failure.

------
We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

Don't go borrowing trouble. For programmers, this means Worry only about what you need to implement.


In reply to Re: Re: Re: Idomatic Handling of Subroutine Error by dragonchild
in thread Idomatic Handling of Subroutine Error by dvergin

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post; it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":