> I personally think that this is something Larry is going to have to > decide. However, I would like to note that leaving these off by default > lowers the transition curve to Perl 6 immensely for those people that > use Perl as a glue/scripting/sysadmin language. Right, but what I don't understand is that its two extra characters at the end of a command line... whats the big deal about typing '-q' on one line in scripts? Its easy enough to advertise '-q' and put it in big lights... My point is that '-w' is pretty much useless because people contribute modules to CPAN that don't have '-w' turned on, and you get lots of junk output from your scripts because other people don't adhere to the '-w'. Hell, *I* don't use '-w' because of this. > Key: Not everyone becomes a Perl expert. Many people never leave > novice/intermediate level. This doesn't mean that we should design the > language for these people, but it also doesn't mean we should thumb our > noses at them. So - why is it a religious issue then? I respect the fact that you want to write scripts without 'use strict'. I do this all the time. But I really think that its a small price to pay to put '-q' on the #!/usr/bin/perl command line for the vast benefits that it would give us all as far as CPAN goes. So - in the place of a '-q', would you support a mechanism for making sure that CPAN is '-w' clean? If so, how would you enforce it? Ed ( ps - if you want to take this offline, its fine by me. If this issue has been covered before, you can tell me the arguments for/against it. But right now I do consider '-w' broken because of this; and it doesn't give me much comfort that lots of the modules on CPAN could have hidden bugs in them because -w is too difficult to use. )Thread Next