Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2022
Dear porters,
when sub bar is not declared at all, 'sub foo { bar() }' compiles under
strict/warnings without any issues. Same goes for 'my $x = \&bar'.
Is this by design? I understand why glob refs would not warn or croak but
Is there a reason why explicitly named subroutines that don't exist at
compile time would not yield even a warning until they are actually called?
On a somewhat related note, how would one detect if a named
subroutine/subref was declared or not (it's ok if it was declared but is
empty) at runtime? Right now I'm doing:
sub subref_is_actually_there ($subref) {
require B;
my $cv = B::svref_2object($subref);
return B::class($cv->ROOT) eq 'NULL' && !${ $cv->const_sv };
}
and it seems to work fine but I'm not confident in it. Is there a better or
more readable/portable way? One that would not need to rely on B::*, maybe
just checking if {CODE} is undef?
I looked on perlsub and perlref but could not reach any reasonable
explanation on either, so any help would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers!
garu
Thread Next