Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
more useful options

Re^3: Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad

by jhourcle (Prior)
on Apr 22, 2005 at 01:39 UTC ( #450256=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^2: Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad
in thread Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad

So barewords were introduced with the assumption subroutine calls would always have amperands -- and as hindsight works so well, we can all see what a bad assumption that was.

(besides, you said 'Presuming no "use strict" (or the days of Perl3)')

... and I'm a newbie -- I learned from Matt's Script Archive the llama book in um...1994? 1995? using Perl 4. I've never used Perl 3.

  • Comment on Re^3: Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://450256]
[ambrus]: wait. I understand no wife and children, but how do you not have to pay for a house?
[hippo]: I had a low-paid job about 20 years ago and seriously considered going down to a 3-day week. Would have worked 60% of the time for about 80% of the cash.
[Corion]: ambrus: Well, I pay rent, but don't own a house with variable/ unforeseeable costs
[hippo]: The thesholds/benefits balance at the time was nuts.
[hippo]: But that doesn't last because, you know ... politicians. :(
[Corion]: hippo: Yeah, if you still get enough money to get by and don't have expensive hobbies or other fixed costs that can work out well
[ambrus]: ah good. I pay only rent too. but that still costs significant money.
[Corion]: ambrus: Yes, but that is already budgeted for

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (8)
As of 2017-09-21 15:19 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    During the recent solar eclipse, I:

    Results (249 votes). Check out past polls.