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 BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 28, 2004 at 17:36 UTC
What makes you think... Cos some people are curious enough to wonder... All you do is cargo cult "no strict" into every bad program! And the difference between a 'bad program with "no strict" cargo culted in' and a 'bad program' is...? Hurray, a great victory! victory? Examine what is said, not who speaks. "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham "Think for yourself!" - Abigail "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon	[reply]
Re^5: Why isn't C<use strict> the default? by Anonymous Monk on Oct 29, 2004 at 08:11 UTC
Cos some people are curious enough to wonder... Curious people whould have read a book or the documentation before starting to program, and whould have known about strict already. And the difference between a 'bad program with "no strict" cargo culted in' and a 'bad program' is...? Nothing, so no reason to break existing programs by making strict the default.	[reply]
Re^6: Why isn't C<use strict> the default? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 29, 2004 at 08:54 UTC
75,000+ lines of POD and/or 30MB of html. If they start at the beginning, how long before they know that the word strict has some significance to Perl? Examine what is said, not who speaks. "Efficiency is intelligent laziness." -David Dunham "Think for yourself!" - Abigail "Memory, processor, disk in that order on the hardware side. Algorithm, algorithm, algorithm on the code side." - tachyon	[reply]
Re^7: Why isn't C<use strict> the default? by Anonymous Monk on Oct 29, 2004 at 09:12 UTC
A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.