Re: Should code that does not use strict even be considered here?

Just to be clear, slapping "use strict" and/or "use warnings" on a piece of code doesn't make code better. It may help the programmer in debugging his code, but in itself, it doesn't modify the quality of code.

And, IMO, people who think its presence on code is a measure of its quality are still mere grasshoppers.

Comment on Re: Should code that does not use strict even be considered here?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Should code that does not use strict even be considered here? by Porculus (Hermit) on Apr 09, 2009 at 15:01 UTC
It's not so much that its presence is a measure of quality, as that its absence is a warning that the code's author may have been inexperienced in the ways of Perl. As such it's a code smell -- one of those little things that make the reader start to feel uneasy about the quality of what they're looking at. Of course, I totally agree that it doesn't really make much sense to insist that they be included by law in all code posted here. I personally would only include them in a code snippet if I was posting something that was intended to be a complete module or script.	[reply]
Re^3: Should code that does not use strict even be considered here? by shmem (Chancellor) on Apr 09, 2009 at 17:25 UTC
as that its absence is a warning that the code's author may have been inexperienced in the ways of Perl. That may come to your mind at first glance. Read on. The code tells you about its author - `use strict` won't, and can't hide the stench, if any.	[reply] [d/l]