--- common-sense/sense.pm	2009/07/09 17:33:40	1.3
+++ common-sense/sense.pm	2009/07/09 17:58:11	1.4
@@ -20,6 +20,22 @@
 
 =over 4
 
+=item no warnings
+
+The dreaded warnings. Even worse, the horribly dreaded C<-w> switch. Even
+though we don't care if other people use warnings (and certainly there are
+useful ones), a lot of warnings simply go against the spirit of Perl, most
+prominently, the warnings related to C<undef>. There is nothing wrong with
+C<undef>: it has well-defined semantics, it is useful, and spitting out
+warnings you never asked for is just evil.
+
+So every module needs C<no warnings> to avoid somebody accidentally using
+C<-w> and forcing his bad standards on our code. No will do.
+
+Funnily enough, L<perllexwarn> explicitly mentions C<-w> (and not in a
+favourable way), but standard utilities, such as L<prove>, or MakeMaker
+when running C<make test> enable them blindly.
+
 =item use strict qw(subs vars)
 
 Using C<use strict> is definitely common sense, but C<use strict
@@ -29,8 +45,8 @@
 
    @{ $var->[0] }
 
-Must be written like this, when C<use strict 'refs'> is in scope, and
-C<$var> can legally be C<undef>:
+Must be written like this (or similarly), when C<use strict 'refs'> is in
+scope, and C<$var> can legally be C<undef>:
 
    @{ $var->[0] || [] }
 
@@ -55,29 +71,12 @@
 modules that are no longer maintained work with newer versions of Perl,
 regardless of use feature.
 
-If your code isn'talive, it's dead, jim.
-
-=item no warnings
-
-The dreaded warnings. Even worse, the horribly dreaded C<-w> switch. Even
-though we don't care if other people use warnings (and certainly there are
-useful ones), a lot of warnings simply go against the spirit of Perl, most
-prominently, the warnings related to C<undef>. There is nothing wrong with
-C<undef>: it has well-defined semantics, it is useful, and spitting out
-warnings you never asked for is just evil.
-
-So every module needs C<no warnings> to avoid somebody accidentally using
-C<-w> and forcing his bad standards on our code. No will do.
-
-(Also, why isn't this a C<use feature> switch? Adding warnings is
-apparently considered O.K., even if it breaks your programs).
+If your code isn't alive, it's dead, jim.
 
 =item much less memory
 
 Just using all those pragmas together waste <blink>I<< B<776> kilobytes
-
 >></blink> of precious memory in my perl, for I<every single perl process
-
 using our code>, which on our machines, is a lot. In comparison, this
 module only uses I<< B<four> >> kilobytes (I even had to write it out so
 it looks like more) of memory on the same platform.
@@ -105,16 +104,23 @@
    $^H{feature_state}  = 1;
 }
 
-=cut
-
 1;
 
 =back
 
+=head1 NO 'no common::sense'
+
+This module doesn't offer an unimport. First of all, it wastes even more
+memory, second, and more importantly, who with even a bit of common sense
+would want no common sense?
+
 =head1 AUTHOR
 
  Marc Lehmann <schmorp@schmorp.de>
  http://home.schmorp.de/
 
+ Robin Redeker, "<elmex at ta-sa.org>".
+
+
 =cut