hurricup has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

According to docs for strict subs:

This disables the poetry optimization, generating a compile-time error if you try to use a bareword identifier that's not a subroutine, unless it is a simple identifier (no colons) and that it appears in curly braces or on the left hand side of the => symbol.

But use Some::Thing -base;, for example, works and not looks like example in docs. Also, it may cause a surprise, when sub with name 'base' been defined before this use.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Why perl with strict allows to use -bareword?
by Anonymous Monk on Jun 27, 2017 at 20:14 UTC
[reply]
      Thank you. Guess this should be mentioned in stricts
[reply]
Re: Why perl with strict allows to use -bareword?
by Anonymous Monk on Jun 27, 2017 at 20:26 UTC
    it may cause a surprise, when sub with name 'base' been defined before this use

    That doesn't make sense: if sub blah has been defined then blah and -blah are not barewords, they are function calls 

    use warnings;
use strict;
BEGIN { $INC{'Blah.pm'}=1 }
sub Blah::import { print "@_\n" }
sub abc { 42 }
use Blah -abc; # "Blah -42"
use Blah -def; # "Blah -def"

    [download]
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      What the parser considers a bareword does depend on what it's seen tho. 
      use warnings;
use strict;
BEGIN { $INC{'Blah.pm'}=1 }
sub Blah::import { print "@_\n" }
sub abc { 42 }
use Blah -abc; # "Blah -42"
use Blah -def; # *still* "Blah -def"
sub def { 999 }

      [download]
      Barewords: "A word that has no other interpretation in the grammar will be treated as if it were a quoted string. ... use strict 'subs'; then any bareword that would NOT be interpreted as a subroutine call produces a compile-time error instead."
[reply]
[d/l]
      Yes, and I expected compilation failure if sub with such name was not defined. According to docs.
[reply]

Back to Seekers of Perl Wisdom