Your comments remind of Avoid fancy words, an idea expressed in Strunk and White's Elements of Style. I wouldn't be the first programmer to suggest this book helps us think about how we program, even though it discussed writing in a natural language - English - as opposed to a programming language.
Why use clever terminology when plain words suffice? For Perl, our stands out as a neologism. In time it will become an established part of the language. But it isn't there yet, at least not for all Perl users. It's a matter of judgement, or ear as Strunk and White put it:
Only the writer whose ear is reliable is in a position to use bad grammar deliberately; only he is able to sustain his work at the level of good taste.
Whether we use our, or other neologisms in Perl, is a matter of taste and timing. At present, both are contentious: our has existed in Perl long enough for common use, but too short for universal acceptance. I avoid it in public code for the reasons you mention, but those reasons become weaker as time passes.
In reply to Re: Use of 'our' considered harmful
by tomhukins
in thread Use of 'our' considered harmful
by DrHyde
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |