> -----Original Message----- > From: Jake [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:56 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Why do we even HAVE to... (was: Why using use strict;) > > > So, in post after post after post I see the comment "always > use strict"...
It's a good suggestion. I've seen several instances of code posted to this list because it had a problem that "use strict" could have caught, but wasn't used. > > I have seen threads where people are insulted because they dont... Really? Where are these threads? Maybe on c.l.p.m > > Every perl tutorial I've seen says you should always "use strict"... > > It apparently doesnt slow down code execution... > > If you dont "use strict", the perl monks will come and flay you... Oh, come on. > > All of this begs the obvious question(s)... > > Why the hell isnt "use strict" built into the language? Why > doesnt perl just > do all that automatically? Backward compatibility is the short answer. That's why I suggest "use strict" for new code. But it really is like "wear your seatbelt". You don't need it until you crash. (Now -w (or use warnings) is another beast altogether. I for one, *never* use -w (or use warnings) in my code. Yet all the tutorials say you should. But note to module writers: you should make your code -w safe for those folks who are being good and using -w) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
