... used undocumented features?
That's the same as: ... encountered a bug?
... used reserved keywords as variable names?
Irrelevant. We have sigils so that reserved words and variable names have nothing to do with eachother. The question might make a little more sense if it said "file handle names", but smart coders who write modern Perl have sigils for those too.
... written a script with no alphabetic characters in it?
Do golfed oneliners count as scripts?
... created variables at runtime?
That happens automatically more often than most people realize.
... used lists of lists?
No, Perl tends to flatten that.
... used associative array operators on the main symbol table?
Don't tell anyone, but we call them hashes now.
... created a loop label at runtime?
Hmm, no. Please teach me how. (eval?)
... used all nine sets of parentheses in a regexp?
Hahaha. We have many, many more than 9 now.
... used grep on non-arrays?
Yeah, I tend to use it on lists.
... used up to five nested evals? ... used more than five nested evals?
Sure, but eval was masked as use, require, and do :)
... abused dynamic scoping by fudging @ARGV?
That is not abuse.
Heavy Wizardry ... used autoloading functions?
(Funny to see that this was ever considered as heavy wizardry :))
the Perl book?
Which one?
Perl is Copyright (c) 1989, 1990, 1991 by Larry Wall
And 1987, 1988, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 :)
Juerd # { site => 'juerd.nl', plp_site => 'plp.juerd.nl', do_not_use => 'spamtrap' }
In reply to Re: Perl Purity Test (For Update)
by Juerd
in thread Perl Purity Test (For Update)
by zer
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |