Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks RobOMonk
XP is just a number
 
PerlMonks  

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

by Anonymous Monk
on Apr 22, 2005 at 10:04 UTC ( #450331=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

Or maybe you have a module that imports an apr() sub into your namespace for calculating Annual Precentage Rates.
As long as subs (or new buildins) without arguments return a string with the same name as they have, all will be well. I mean, if oct were to be defined that oct() eq "oct", the OPs example would not have been a problem.


Comment on Re^3: Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad
Re: Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad
by benizi (Hermit) on Apr 22, 2005 at 21:24 UTC

    While I like the clever solution to the problem at hand (barewords), I'm much happier that Perl chose the DWIMery of using a default argument of $_, e.g.: perl -Mstrict -lwe 'print for map oct, qw/077 777 034/'

    (63, 511, 28) vs. ("oct", "oct", "oct")

Re^4: Why use strict is good, and barewords are bad
by hardburn (Abbot) on Apr 22, 2005 at 21:27 UTC

    And if we could get around those pesky laws of thermodynamics, we could have a perpetual motion machine.

    "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://450331]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (16)
As of 2014-04-16 15:31 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    April first is:







    Results (432 votes), past polls