Re^2: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?

1 violations of Editor::RequireEmacsFileVariables.

Oh My God!!!!!!!!!!

Every perl script I ever wrote contains at least 1 violations". even if it is totally empty! Woe is me.

Actually, without bothering to look up the other violations being commited above, I'm guessing half a dozen others would also be triggered by an empty, or all whitespace source file.

What's next? Will I be penalised because Blond highlights with a hint of purple are just "so 2007"?

I'm really hoping that you thought that the above was worth posting on the basis of an ironic critique of the critic.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

RIP PCW It is as I've been saying!(Audio until 20090817)

Comment on Re^2: Defining a sub within a sub: OK?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Defining a sub within a sub: OK? by Khen1950fx (Canon) on Oct 15, 2009 at 01:06 UTC
++! I was thinking of something more gothic---black with a hint of neon green:-).	[reply]
Re^4: Defining a sub within a sub: OK? by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Oct 15, 2009 at 02:34 UTC
In truth, I'm more non-descript brown with a smattering of grey, but Google failed to turn up a plaintiff cry from anyone similarly afflicted. a hint of neon green Neon is '90s; '80s are in the ascendant. Try chartreuse . Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice. RIP PCW It is as I've been saying!(Audio until 20090817)	[reply]