comment on

I think it's a sign of poor programming if your code bends backwards to satisfy strict, when the code could have been shorter, easier to understand and maintain and less error prone with a strategic 'no strict'.

I buy that, when applied to short scripts, one-liners and throw-away code. For anything longer, or anything where a large number of people are going to be working on the code, it's nearly always easier to adhere to strict than to take the shortcuts and risk having to explain to colleagues and maintainers why you've made the decision you made.

In the context of the OP (which is the context in which my comment should be read), where the snippet seems to be a cut-down excerpt from something bigger, I think that turning off strictness to kludge something in is a bad idea. In this context, I stand by what I said: something needs rethinking.

Update: What ++Transient said :)

-- Foxcub
#include www.liquidfusion.org.uk

In reply to Re^3: strict or not strict? by Tanalis
in thread strict or not strict? by rsiedl

Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:
<code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>
Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.


We don't bite newbies here... much
	PerlMonks