BrowserUk has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Does it make sense to anyone else that chomp tests and carps about receiving a read-only parameter, before it tests whether it would require modification?

C:\perl-5.8.6>perl -e"chomp( 'fred' )" Can't modify constant item in chomp at -e line 1, at end of line Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

Obviously, it doesn't make much sense to chomp a constant, but if your operating within a sub, you don't know what the user will pass you.

chomp is conditional. If the user passes a constant that doesn't need chomping it would be nice to allow that through without having to duplicate the tests inherent in chomp?

Examine what is said, not who speaks.
Silence betokens consent.
Love the truth but pardon error.
Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco.

20050317 Edit by castaway: Changed title from 'A premature ejaculation?'