Re: define.pm - a new pragma to declare global constants

In the first paragraph under DESCRIPTION, you say that there are three ways to call the pragma, but you only demonstrate two of them.

--rjray

Comment on Re: define.pm - a new pragma to declare global constants

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(MeowChow) Re2: define.pm - a new pragma to declare global constants by MeowChow (Vicar) on Apr 02, 2002 at 22:16 UTC
Whoops, good catch. I had removed the third way, which was to simply call `use define;` with no arguments. This would have imported all global constants into the namespace. I decided that any constants that were actually used would get `no define ...` statements anyway, so this call was superfluous. Thoughts anyone? MeowChow s aamecha.s a..a\u$&owag.print	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: (MeowChow) Re2: define.pm - a new pragma to declare global constants by petral (Curate) on Apr 03, 2002 at 14:58 UTC
Yeah, comment: Requiring `no define`'s is a forced `use strict;`. Sure, `use strict;` makes for better maintanability/reusability, but it's not on by default (and if it were, it could be turned off). Having `use define` 'just work' seems like it would be a boon during development -- or for one-shots, prototypes, in-house utility hacks, whatever. p	[reply] [d/l] [select]
(MeowChow) Re4: define.pm - a new pragma to declare global constants by MeowChow (Vicar) on Apr 03, 2002 at 18:51 UTC
That's a very good point, and a good analogy. I think I'll throw that code back in. MeowChow s aamecha.s a..a\u$&owag.print	[reply]