Re^3: The Perl Crackpot Index

The question at hand was whether or not strict and warnings were needed. The original bullet point stated another way is "there is no way to write good Perl without using strict and warnings". Since you conceded that it is possible to write good and maintanable Perl without using strict and warnings, the original statement is false. QED.

thor

Feel the white light, the light within Be your own disciple, fan the sparks of will For all of us waiting, your kingdom will come

Comment on Re^3: The Perl Crackpot Index

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: The Perl Crackpot Index by runrig (Abbot) on Jul 26, 2005 at 19:11 UTC
The question at hand was whether or not strict and warnings were needed. The original bullet point stated another way is "there is no way to write good Perl without using strict and warnings". The question is whether or not you are arguing that you don't need strict and warnings. If you are writing alot of code where strict just gets in the way (like if you are TheDamian), then you don't need to argue the non-necessity of strict.	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^4: The Perl Crackpot Index
by runrig (Abbot) on Jul 26, 2005 at 19:11 UTC

The question at hand was whether or not strict and warnings were needed. The original bullet point stated another way is "there is no way to write good Perl without using strict and warnings".

The question is whether or not you are arguing that you don't need strict and warnings. If you are writing alot of code where strict just gets in the way (like if you are TheDamian), then you don't need to argue the non-necessity of strict.

[reply]