[Israel.pm] function prototypes

Ephraim Dan E.Dan at F5.com
Wed Jun 11 06:21:11 PDT 2008

> On 11 Jun 2008 11:44:39 +0300, sawyer x wrote:
> >
> > There is only one reason to use prototypes and that's for nifty and
> > nice looking functions that don't require parenthesis
> Mikhael Goikhman replied:
> You forgot to add "IMHO", because without it this clame is false.

[edan] Sorry, but I have to jump in here.  I think "IMHO" can be
considered to be implied when anyone makes a statement about anything
other than a pure raw fact - anything else is obviously only the opinion
of the author.  I guess you could argue whether "humble" is implied, but
"opinion" certainly is.

But I find it kind of ironic that you jump on his case about a so-called
"false claim" that is not only his own opinion (so how can it be
false?), but is shared by the authors of perl's own documentation.  From
perldoc perlop:

Because the intent of this feature is primarily to let you define
sub-routines that work like built-in functions ..."

Which is basically what sawyer x said.

Food for thought.


More information about the Perl mailing list