Re: C<strict> as default (was Re: RFC 16 (v1))

Daniel Chetlin wrote:
> But I agree that this was an accident and a mistake. And like I say later in
> the RFC, I feel that trying to fix this mistake by making C<strict> the
> default is like <insert clever analogy about fixing one problem with an
> unrelated solution>.
> 
> I have more to say, but I'm sure I'll have plenty of time; I'm hoping to hear
> from lots of others about this as well. If it turns out that most people would
> prefer C<strict> by default, I will feel no shame in folding my RFC.

  Oh, no; don't fold your RFC.  The idea is to submit all the ideas
and let Larry Wall decide, not necessarily to reach a 100% consensus
among the community.  I feel the same way as you: let every approach
and rationale be heard.  So far, my little stint in the Perl6
community has been very refreshingly civil compared to some other
groups I've been with on the Internet, even though we do have quite a
bit of disagreement.

> I'm just
> banking on the fact that a fair amount of people share my lax-by-default
> philosophy about Perl.

  Yes, it's apparent that many do.  I think we've heard most of the
thoughts on this subject from the people who are here, but I hopefully
as more people join in we'll hear more ideas and get a better feel for
what people really want.

J. David