Of course, I know the limitations of Indirect Object syntax. Maybe I shouldn't use it in sample code for newbies, yes, but WhiteBird is an abbot. And please please don't call the thing "dreaded" because it is not. | [reply] |
I don't care what you know, I was talking about your example code (code which is intended as an example of how you suggest someone else write their code) which uses syntax that is explicitly warned against in the documentation that comes with perl itself.
It also has nothing to do with the PerlMonks "Experience" rating (which we all know has nothing whatsoever to do with a persons experience with perl) of the OP - your post is read by other people since it is posted in a public forum, and they might look at it and think "oh, that's how I should write my code".
If I dread it, then I can call it dreaded all I want. But I think that when the syntax is described by the perl documentation in the following terms:
"... the grief when it messes up just isn't worth the years of debugging it will take you to track down such subtle bugs."
then it can rightfully be called "dreaded", with a fair degree of objectiveness.
</rant>
| [reply] |
