It's not that I'm doubting or arguing with you, I just don't understand what nuance of the language I'm missing.

Lexical variables are determined at compile time:

# file Foo.pm
use strict;
package Foo.pm
my  $bee = 2; # lexical variable

sub foo {
 return $bee++;
}
[download]

Assuming that's all in that file, Foo::foo() is the only subroutine with a handle on the lexical $bee. Note that foo() even keeps that variable available when $bee goes "out of scope". this is very important in understanding what's really going on. You'll want to do a search on "perl closures".

That means there is no way to get at $bee except via Foo::foo(). Say:

# some other file Bar.pm
use strict;
package Bar;
sub bar {
  return $bee;
}
[download]

That fails because there is no $Bar::bee variable, but also, there is no way to specify you actually meant the $bee variable bound to the Foo::foo function.

Note that package (or "global") variables can be accessed from other scopes:

# file Foo.pm
package Foo;
our $blah = 2; # or use vars
[download]

#file Bar.pm
package Bar;
print $Foo::blah;
[download]

"What should it profit a man, if he should win a flame war, yet lose his cool?"

...And the string eval is processed at runtime, so it's essentially in the main namespace? Wow. My brain hurts now, but I feel enlightened! Thanks!