Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2008
* Mark Mielke <mark@mark.mielke.cc> [2008-06-23 19:55]:
> I don't trust Perl, and (unfortunately) our code needs to run
> on Perl 5.004 and before.
How about finding out instead of dumbing the code down to your
level of insecurity? :-)
> If somebody can convince me that all versions of Perl 5.004 and
> later will ALWAYS treat 'foo' as literal without quotes in this
> context, I'll be happy to drop it. It may have been Perl
> earlier than 5.004 that sometimes did unexpected things with:
>
> $foo{time} = 2;
Are you sure you don’t have that backwards? Because I know that
many people get surprised by the *opposite* case, where they
expected the function to be called but it gets interpreted
literally as a string instead – eg. here:
use constant BAZ => 'bar;
$foo{BAZ} = 'quux';
They expect to find `quux` under the key `bar`, but instead Perl
uses `BAZ` as the literal key.
In any case hash key auto-quoting has never done anything
unexpected for me. As long as the key is a valid bareword, it
gets quoted. The rule is very simple and consistent, and I avoid
keys that won’t fit the rule as much as possible so I can avoid
the quotes whenever possible.
> Better to consistently use quotes everywhere.
>
> Such is my opinion and style. Is it comparable to return vs
> not? It's similar but not the same. In the case of consistent
> quoting, it means I can use all values without worrying about
> it failing for me one day. In the case of return, both work
> fine and will not fail one day.
It’s not comparable to `return` vs nothing, but it’s comparable
to `WHATEVER if ($cond)` vs `WHATEVER if $cond`, which is an
example you brought up.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next