To be honest, is there really a need to worry about this?
Usually, no. But several of the modules I've written are intended as very low-level building blocks and thus I want them to be backwards compatible as far as possible in case other authors want to or need to write something to run on an ancient version of Perl. (E.g. Class::InsideOut, Test::Number::Delta)
Generally, I try to avoid using handy syntactical sugar if I don't need to. For example, if my only use of our is to specify the module's $VERSION, then I don't feel that little bit of sugar is really worth breaking my module on older Perls.
Side note: I found it interesting to run Perl::MinimumVersion on some of my code. There are often very simple and easily avoided things that prevent backward compatibility if that's important.
-xdg
Code written by xdg and posted on PerlMonks is public domain. It is provided as is with no warranties, express or implied, of any kind. Posted code may not have been tested. Use of posted code is at your own risk.
In reply to Re^2: Backward compatible lexical warnings
by xdg
in thread Backward compatible lexical warnings
by xdg
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |