Re: Why isn't C<use strict> the default?

in reply to Why isn't C<use strict> the default?

to "Perl isn't a B&D language", but who or what would be inconvenienced if it were?

With all due respect, things like strong typing, checked exceptions, whiny long function names, lack of automagicality, very long call chains, and such are the root of all evil. Don't confuse strict with B&D languages.

If you are asking "who or what would be inconvienced if Perl was a B&D language", the answer is EVERYONE!

Comment on Re: Why isn't C<use strict> the default?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Why isn't C<use strict> the default? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 28, 2004 at 13:17 UTC
"who or what would be inconvienced if Perl was a B&D language" I didn't ask that...and your preaching to the converted. :) Examine what is said, not who speaks. "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham "Think for yourself!" - Abigail "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon	[reply]

In Section Meditations