On 05/03/12 22:30, Aaron Crane wrote: > … that's a good point. Perhaps leave in the check that @ARGV is 1, > but still use<> for convenience. Good idea! > I'd recommend cpanminus rather than cpan, but yes, that's a pretty > simple option. At the risk of marking myself out as a clueless n00b, what's the actual advantage of cpanm over cpan? Miles