in reply to Re: (ichimunki) Re x 3: Thoughts on Perl6 - Love it? Hate it?
in thread Thoughts on Perl6 - Love it? Hate it?
Your example methodology adds not one, but two layers of indirection to what is otherwise a straightforward question-- and gets none of the fall through capability of the typical switch statement at the same time. It is therefore less than optimal in situations where switch is designed to be most used.
The one place your indirect method absolutely shines is when you want to set up a mutating hash of anonymous subs (the dispatch table essentially). You keep your condition tree static perhaps (or the condition tree could be just another dispatch (or dispatches!) in the dispatch table). Then you can swap different subs in an out for the same results/conditions labels. Although I'd have to wonder if you can do this for any non-trivial, non-proof of concept application and maintain your sanity or the application later. *grin*
The one place your indirect method absolutely shines is when you want to set up a mutating hash of anonymous subs (the dispatch table essentially). You keep your condition tree static perhaps (or the condition tree could be just another dispatch (or dispatches!) in the dispatch table). Then you can swap different subs in an out for the same results/conditions labels. Although I'd have to wonder if you can do this for any non-trivial, non-proof of concept application and maintain your sanity or the application later. *grin*
In Section
Meditations