On Sun, 7 May 2023 19:21:11 -0700
Philip Guenther <guent...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 7, 2023 at 6:13 AM Marc Espie <marc.espie.open...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm actually wondering whether keeping the prototype is worth it.
> ...
> For plain subs, I would only keep them if they _really_ help the calls look
> for more perl-ish, by whatever scale you currently measure that. Maybe a
> (&@) prototype so you can do "mysub { s/implicit/sub here/ } qw(args here)"
> ala map and grep, but...eh.
I wrote some (&@) prototypes before v5.36,
| use v5.28;
| use warnings;
| use experimental 'signatures';
|
| sub bsearch :prototype(&@) ($block, @list) { ... }
| sub bsearch_range :prototype(&@) ($block, $low, $high) { ... }
The signature checks that bsearch_range has exactly 3 arguments.
I sometimes call subs with the wrong number of arguments. My other
frequent mistakes in Perl are syntax errors, strict(3p) errors, and
warnings(3p) of uninitialized values.
