Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2021
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021, at 8:13 PM, Christian Walde wrote: > On Sat, 27 Mar 2021 01:08:04 +0100, Ricardo Signes <perl.p5p@rjbs.manxome.org> wrote: >> I'm not even trying to tell you to agree. I'm just saying "no one would expect that or find it useful" is … well, a weird claim. (Do you think I would be suggesting we adopt some behavior that I found surprising and useless?) > > I think this comes down to the same issue as with the "new defaults" thing. > > Originally no-strict perl was intended by Larry to be easier and approachable for newbies and literally called "baby perl". I'm not sure it's really right to ascribe this sort of intent. Perl variable were originally all like awk variables, created as referenced, no muss, no fuss, no typo protection. This wasn't creating an environment of baby Perl, because there was no "grown up" way to write variables. Perl 5 introduced strictures, and to be backward compatible, they were off unless you asked for them. That said, I have defended "baby Perl" many times, and will continue to do so. Whether or not the basic "beginner's Perl" should have strictures on is a topic for another, longer conversation, which I promised to start off this weekend. (Tonight, it's getting late. 😉) > I suspect people with different expectations of trim and thoughts about chomp come more often than not from different generations of learning. I would like to acknowledge that reasonable people have differing expectations of how a "trim" built-in might behave for many different reasons, including those you name. -- rjbsThread Previous | Thread Next