in reply to sometimes use strict isn't enough

What you are refering to is the difference between compile-time errors and run-time errors. use strict does not catch run-time errors. Matter of, fact, the only thing that can catch run-time errors is a pair of eyes - someone else's pair of eyes usually sees it before your pair of eyes!! :D (figuratively speaking)

Good example, Perl will happily compile and run this without complaining in the least - bonus points for an explanation why: 

foreach (@list) {
  $conn-do("insert into foo values($_)") || die;
}

[download]
when i really meant this: 
foreach (@list) {
  $conn->do("insert into foo values($_)") || die;
}

[download]
So, DO rely on strict to check for the things that strict can verify. It's your brain that you shouldn't rely on - mine get's me in trouble every time at least ;)

jeffa

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (jeffa) Re: sometimes use strict isn't enough
by blakem (Monsignor) on Oct 25, 2001 at 03:05 UTC
    One slight correction...

    strict 'subs' and strict 'vars' run their checks at compile time, but the third goblin in that group strict 'refs' enables runtime checks.

    (sorry, I was inspired by the dancing skeleton on your homenode ...... ;-) )

    Consider the following code, which will toss a strict error during runtime, depending on the flip of a coin: 

    #!/usr/bin/perl -wT
use strict;

use vars qw($foo $bar);

$foo = 'x';
$bar = int(rand(2)) ? 'foo' : \$foo;

print $$bar, "\n";

=OUTPUT (when rand==0)
x

=OUTPUT (when rand==1)
Can't use string ("foo") as a SCALAR ref 
while "strict refs" in use at ./strictrefs.pl
line 9.

    [download]

    -Blake

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Meditations