develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from January 2008

Re: 5.11 (or 12) and strict

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
=?UTF-8?Q?=C3=86var_Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0_Bjarmason?=
Date:
January 10, 2008 06:02
Subject:
Re: 5.11 (or 12) and strict
Message ID:
51dd1af80801100602w4fe10506kfe29f1e5ef3ba7fb@mail.gmail.com
On 1/9/08, Glenn Linderman <perl@nevcal.com> wrote:
> On approximately 1/9/2008 10:14 AM, came the following characters from
> the keyboard of Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason:
> > On 1/3/08, Sean O'Rourke <seano@cs.ucsd.edu> wrote:
> >> Moritz Lenz <moritz@casella.verplant.org> writes:
> >>> You can still say
> >>> no strict;
> >>> after importing 5.10 (or 5.1\d) features. Or you can selectively import
> >>> the shiny new 5.1\d features that you want to use.
> >> Both of which are a pain.  My claim was that "I want the latest
> >> features" implying "I want strictures" seems like the wrong
> >> default.
> >
> > FWIW I agree. Wheher or not people think strict is a good idea shoving
> > shiny features and language strictness under the same hat strikes me
> > as a bad idea.
>
> It strikes me as a good idea, if there is ever a goal to deprecate and
> eventually eliminate some of the behaviours currently permitted under
> "no strict;" but not permitted with "use strict;".  While Perl 6 is the
> "break all compatibility" development path, and Perl 5 would need to
> move very slowly regarding compatibility to avoid invalidating large
> portions of CPAN and hidden user code, with proper deprecation cycles,
> it shouldn't be forced to retain compatibility with bad practices forever.

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough in my comment. What I was trying to get
at is regardless of whether anyone thinks using strict is a good idea
in general I think categorizing strictness under "feature" is
counterintuative. When I C<use feature> in 5.12 I wouldn't expect to
have something else which has had a different interface from 5.0 to
5.10 snuck into my code.

If we want to have a way of saying "I want to use the recommended Perl
5.* language" that should probably be C<use 5.12;> as pointed out
earlier in this thread.

Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About