> > sub some_run_mode
> > {
> > # eventually
> > # $self->append_content('...');
> > $self->run_mode('named_run_mode');
> > return;
> > }
> I don't see an advantage over:
> return $self->named_run_mode()
I've missed the beginning of this discussion, so just tell me to shut
up if I'm off track here.
I often alter run_mode in setup() after I sanity check input (they called
run mode "Bar", which also expects a valid search term. Their search term
is invalid, so I'll set the run_mode to "Foo". One case that happens
often is when I use "friendly" URLs: index.cgi?129 In this case, it will
do one thing if input is given, or something else if no imput is given. I
can't rely on the 'rm' param in this case, so I have setup() do some
checks and set the run_mode. If setup is doing it, It would be wrong to
return $self->named_run_mode;
> If you have the run-mode name in a variable you can do:
> my $run_mode = "foo";
> return $self->$run_mode();
>
> And the code will call foo(). Isn't Perl great?
Isn't that a soft reference that:
1) Makes strict angry
2) Is discouraged, because 90% of soft-references should be hash elements?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/cgiapp@lists.vm.com/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
