Re^3: Why isn't C<use strict> the default?

So, you don't like the culture of Perl and you want to change it? You want to change the way 99% of the people are coding Perl? You think this is good for the language or its culture? Enlighten us, please!

AM sits back with some popcorn, awaiting a show with lots of unfounded statistics

Comment on Re^3: Why isn't C<use strict> the default?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Why isn't C<use strict> the default? by Mutant (Priest) on Oct 28, 2004 at 12:58 UTC
Maybe you've been lucky enough to only come across code which has been written under use strict. Trying to debug or maintain code that isn't is a nightmare. The fact is (and no, I don't have statistics to back this up, but I'm sure there's questions relating to this in the PerlMonks faqs) that far too many people code without use strict when they should be. Then, they end up with a whole lot of issues, and think Perl's to blame. In fact, it's not Perl, it's the lack of strictures. If use strict was on by default, these people would learn to code in Perl properly in the first place, and save a whole lot of pointless questions on Perl Monks..	[reply]
Re^5: Why isn't C<use strict> the default? by Anonymous Monk on Oct 28, 2004 at 17:03 UTC
Trying to debug on maintain code that isn't properly indented is a nightmare to maintain as well. Should that become mandatory as well - only being able to be turned off by putting some voodoo on top of your program? I mean, the first thing Perl programmer say what their opinion is about Python is "horrible white space rules". Yet we all think that indentation is good, and still we find it a horror if the language mandates it by default.	[reply]