3 ms·

Chris, we’re good. As others have pointed out, sometimes an edgy joke gets an edgy response.

by peteretep 5y ago

LandR 5y ago
This is what is considered edgy nowadays?
- jancsika 5y ago
  A generous interpretation would be that the OP meant "edgy" as in definition 2a from Webster's[1]: being on edge : tense, irritable In other words-- GP recounted a memory of tense, anxious feelings about working with Perl. OP was unwittingly made edgy by reading this and anthropomorphized Perl to express said feelings of tension and anxiety back to GP. Seems plausible to me. [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/edgy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/edgy
jamal-kumar 5y ago
Honest question. When did: use strict; Become more commonplace usage?
- kbenson 5y ago
  It started around two decades ago, but I would say the "use strict if at all possible or you're doing it wrong" consensus was reached at least as long ago as 2005, being conservative. Because backwards compatibility was always seen as paramount, it never became default, but if you opted into new version features by version number[1], those advanced to enabled both new features and to turn off or warn on use of what were considered problematic features in the code. For example, a "use v5.10;" pragma would warn indirect method syntax with the assumption you never wanted that (so any new Foo("arg"); would error, so people would use Foo->new("arg"); as the sane agreed upon way it should be done), and would disable bareword filehandles (so you would need to assign them to a scalar like $FH instead of FH). use v5.12 and later also automatically enabled strict. Perl 5.10 was released in late 2007, and 5.12 in 2010, so there was enough consensus over a decade ago to add it as the default for anyone opting into the bundle of all newer Perl features. 1: https://perldoc.perl.org/feature#FEATURE-BUNDLES https://perldoc.perl.org/feature#FEATURE-BUNDLES
  - jamal-kumar 5y ago
    Thanks for that answer, very interesting to know as someone who feels like they got into perl pretty late in the game. I do appreciate it where it works for sure. I could definitely picture programming in perl in the 90s before people commonly implemented use strict; being a complete hellscape though
    - kbenson 5y ago
      Yes, and it was exacerbated by mod_perl in Apache basically working by taking a Perl script/CGI and using eval to turn it into a sub, meaning any subs defined in that script (and not a module it included) to accidentally create closures easily, which really played havoc, and so people adopted... interesting workarounds[1], all in the name of performance. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11670454 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11670454
- ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
  I've been using it as long as I can remember. I'm a -wall kinda guy.

Chris, we’re good. As others have pointed out, sometimes an edgy joke gets an edgy response.

LandR 5y ago

This is what is considered edgy nowadays?

jancsika 5y ago
A generous interpretation would be that the OP meant "edgy" as in definition 2a from Webster's[1]: being on edge : tense, irritable In other words-- GP recounted a memory of tense, anxious feelings about working with Perl. OP was unwittingly made edgy by reading this and anthropomorphized Perl to express said feelings of tension and anxiety back to GP. Seems plausible to me. [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/edgy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/edgy

jamal-kumar 5y ago

Honest question. When did: use strict; Become more commonplace usage?

kbenson 5y ago
It started around two decades ago, but I would say the "use strict if at all possible or you're doing it wrong" consensus was reached at least as long ago as 2005, being conservative. Because backwards compatibility was always seen as paramount, it never became default, but if you opted into new version features by version number[1], those advanced to enabled both new features and to turn off or warn on use of what were considered problematic features in the code. For example, a "use v5.10;" pragma would warn indirect method syntax with the assumption you never wanted that (so any new Foo("arg"); would error, so people would use Foo->new("arg"); as the sane agreed upon way it should be done), and would disable bareword filehandles (so you would need to assign them to a scalar like $FH instead of FH). use v5.12 and later also automatically enabled strict. Perl 5.10 was released in late 2007, and 5.12 in 2010, so there was enough consensus over a decade ago to add it as the default for anyone opting into the bundle of all newer Perl features. 1: https://perldoc.perl.org/feature#FEATURE-BUNDLES https://perldoc.perl.org/feature#FEATURE-BUNDLES
- jamal-kumar 5y ago
  Thanks for that answer, very interesting to know as someone who feels like they got into perl pretty late in the game. I do appreciate it where it works for sure. I could definitely picture programming in perl in the 90s before people commonly implemented use strict; being a complete hellscape though
  - kbenson 5y ago
    Yes, and it was exacerbated by mod_perl in Apache basically working by taking a Perl script/CGI and using eval to turn it into a sub, meaning any subs defined in that script (and not a module it included) to accidentally create closures easily, which really played havoc, and so people adopted... interesting workarounds[1], all in the name of performance. 1: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11670454 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11670454
ChrisMarshallNY 5y ago
I've been using it as long as I can remember. I'm a -wall kinda guy.