or is perlmonks (as much as i love it!) a bit too perfectionistic at times??It's not about being perfectionistic, it's about being practical. Why should seekers of perl wisdom waste everyone's time on a piece of code which misteriously breaks but doesn't use strict or warnings? Wouldn't you find it embarresing to ask for help, have a monk examine your code and turn strict/warnings on and have the problem become apparent in under 10 seconds? Wouldn't you consider such a post a total waste of everyones time? I sure would
In reply to Re: Perlmonk's "best pratices" in the real world
by Anonymous Monk
in thread Perlmonk's "best pratices" in the real world
by schweini
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |