Re: Closures and default lexical-scope for subs

[Peter Scott]

At 12:43 PM 2/15/01 -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 02:40:52PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 15, 2001 at 12:25:44PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > > well, I was thinking about this - there really should be an extra 
> switch that
> > > makes this possible, rather than typing 'no strict; no warn;' ie:
> > >
> > > #!/usr/local/bin/perl -q # for quick and dirty.
> >
> > We already have a switch that means "quick and dirty", it's called
> > "-e"
>
>Beautiful. then just co-opt it. Right now when I say:
>
>#!/usr/local/bin/perl -e
>
>in a file i get
>
>Can't emulate -e on #! line at a.p.
>
>Either that, or add '-q' as a file version for '-e'.
>
>And in any case, make '-e' have the additional connotation that implies
>'no strict', and 'no warn'.

no 'warnings'

>  Seems simple enough to me.

Yes, that's what I thought; but this has generated more heat than light, at 
least on the times I've brought it up, e.g.,

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg00025.html

Better get the asbestos underwear ready.
--
Peter Scott
Pacific Systems Design Technologies