Re^3: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die

Well yes, I can construct mnemonics, German and English being very similar helps.

But still I'm confused about the need to have several names for things which are almost similar - i.e. different only in orthogonal dimensions - instead of parametrizing them.

Thanks anyway! =)

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery}

Comment on Re^3: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by Your Mother (Archbishop) on May 30, 2018 at 17:19 UTC
I agree that PHPisms like 500 extra, semi-overlapping keywords can be a bad thing but I've always liked Carp's interface. Taking the generalized and parameterized route to extremes is `warn` and `die` becoming replaced with `error($level, $message)` or something. I use Carp's functions enough, including `longmess` and `shortmess` for logs, that I much prefer having specific functions for `ack`ing around and such.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by LanX (Saint) on May 30, 2018 at 17:27 UTC
I'm fine with Huffman* coding keywords (often used = own keyword) and naming functions is indeed difficult ... But I'm still not happy, sorry ! :) Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery} update PS: any need to explain MilliHuffman? ;-)	[reply]
Re^6: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by Your Mother (Archbishop) on May 30, 2018 at 17:48 UTC
I liked some of your thoughts about "nice to haves" above and I'm always open to new approaches even though I've never met Ms Huffman. I propose some replacements/aliases– carp ⇢ gripe cluck ⇢ kvetch croak ⇢ lament confess ⇢ dirge shortmess ⇢ demur longmess ⇢ expostulate Now we're getting somewhere. I am seeing an Acme:: future here; especially if it duplicates every single function in the core and in common usage from the more popular CPAN modules, with the entire thesaurus entry for each! :P ← You can't stop me!	[reply]
Re^7: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by LanX (Saint) on May 30, 2018 at 17:59 UTC
Re^7: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by karlgoethebier (Abbot) on May 31, 2018 at 20:04 UTC
Re^4: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die by jeffenstein (Hermit) on May 30, 2018 at 17:43 UTC
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	[reply]
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]


Problems? Is your data what you think it is?
	PerlMonks

Re^3: Should I use carp/croak or warn/die

update