Re^3: Can I include O_CREAT, O_EXCEL and O_WRONLY in my script without always requiring Fcntl?

If you go that far, you might not be able to rely on strict. At some point, you have to assume that your customers have non-broken systems. For me, that point is being able to use at least the core modules.

Comment on Re^3: Can I include O_CREAT, O_EXCEL and O_WRONLY in my script without always requiring Fcntl?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Can I include O_CREAT, O_EXCEL and O_WRONLY in my script without always requiring Fcntl? by rzward (Monk) on Apr 14, 2006 at 00:28 UTC
Thank you for your follow-up. Well, the production version of my script doesn't actually rely on `strict`. Originally, I decided to not include `use strict` in the production version of the script to allow the script to run faster. But since my script doesn't `use` any module, it can run on configurations that do not have @INC set up properly, which I'm thinking may happen fairly often. If I were to include `use strict` and `use Fcntl` in the production version of the script in the next version, I wonder how many people who upgrade will give me a call about the problem this exposes. I just don't see a reason why I need to go that route when I can avoid it. Thanks again. Richard	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Can I include O_CREAT, O_EXCEL and O_WRONLY in my script without always requiring Fcntl? by chromatic (Archbishop) on Apr 15, 2006 at 00:55 UTC
You know your customers, but I certainly wouldn't do that. I've spent far too long holding the hands of customers who refuse to invest in a working platform (and I don't mean an operating system I like; I mean a system that functions) to invest much time and energy into workarounds for increasing levels of brokenness. If you can't count on a complete installation of the core system of Perl, I think you're in for a lot of trouble.	[reply]