perlmeditation rir When I first encountered the idea, presented in Conway's Perl Best Practices, that <c>use English</c> be a best practice, I just thought it another of [theDamien]'s attempts to enable novice Perlers. Many of those practices might rankle a more experienced Perler, but I see the sense of them and only fault the idea if it creates a bar to advancing the skill of the crew. I don't see using a different name for something as a loss or gain of skill. I scarcely ever mentally verbalize <code>$_</code> and such, so having a precise and formal name in front of me would seem to be an asset. But the <code>use English</code> practice continued to seem artificial to me and I could not formulate a reason. What made it curious is that I don't use puncish variables much--it was a small issue: why do I resist using <c>English</c>? but it persisted. I'm pretty comfortable around these: <code>@_</code>, <code>$_</code>, <code>$/</code>, <code>$.</code>, <code>$|</code>, <code>$/</code>, <code>$0</code>, <code>$@</code>, and <code>$,</code>. And I think I'd usually recognize: <code>$`</code>, <code>$'</code>, <code>$!</code>, <code>$$</code>, <code>$\</code>, and <code>$^O</code>. There will need to be powerful contextual hints for me to know, on sight, most of the others. Well, I eventually clued to why puncish is beautiful. And it was all about how puncish vars help a coder who is not well versed with them. When I read <c>$LIST_SEPARATOR</c>, I may be confused as to its derivation; perhaps there is some parsing or data packing happening in user code. When I see the equivalent <c>$"</c>, I will know that <c>perldoc perlvar</c> has the definition. The beauty of puncish variables is in the ease with which they can be recognized as perlvars. There is an elegance to the namespace. When I do need to know what <c>$<</c> is, I'll know right where to look. Be well, rir