Thanks for the clarifications. I apologize for my mischaracterization.
I don't consider the LIMITATIONS section of Switch to be even close to adequate. It mentions rather specific limitations in parsing which is likely to give the opposite impression from the Perl6::Rules disclaimer that I quoted. That is, they imply that other than these few exceptions, the parsing of complex code is unlikely to be a problem.
But I've seen reports of problems that are not covered by any of the specific cases listed (such as the contents of comment lines causing very random-looking problems). Does the module always correctly distinguish a '/' character for division from a '/' character that starts a regex (which requires tracking prototypes), just to pick one example?
I once started writing code that would use Inline::Files but quickly switched to a different method when I realized that the module used a source filter. I felt that the problems I'd seen reported for Switch justified a disclaimer like the Perl6::Rules one I quoted and, since neither Switch nor Inline::Files contained anything close to that, I did not feel I could trust Inline::Files at all.
So, personally, I suggest modifying the documentation of these modules to make the (rather wide, no?) distinction clearer.
I apologize again for the unfair thrashing. I hope the above helps to explain the misunderstanding that lead to my confusion.
In reply to Re^5: On Commenting Out 'use strict;' (source filters)