Re^4: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die

I can only guess why Larry & Co. did it this way, and that guess would be that it was to preserve backwards-compatibility with perl 4, which already had the current interface for warn and die.

Did caller exist in perl 4? It kind of makes sense to use a different interface since modules got a lot of changes in 5.0

Comment on Re^4: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by afoken (Chancellor) on May 30, 2018 at 21:52 UTC
Did caller exist in perl 4? According to http://www.rexswain.com/perl4.html, caller existed in Perl 4, and so did die and warn. Alexander -- Today I will gladly share my knowledge and experience, for there are no sweeter words than "I told you so". ;-)	[reply]
Re^5: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die (perl4) by shmem (Chancellor) on May 31, 2018 at 00:04 UTC
From the perl.n manpage of perl 4 patchlevel 36: caller(EXPR) caller Returns the context of the current subroutine call: ($package,$filename,$line) = caller; With EXPR, returns some extra information that the debugger uses to print a stack trace. The value of EXPR indicates how many call frames to go back before the current one. perl -le'print map{pack c,($-++?1:13)+ord}split//,ESEL'	[reply]