I'm not against limits in programming languages. They help to reduce the complexity that have to be managed.

Limited languages are suitable for those that are willing to manage only so much. That's why Java has no "goto".

But Perl does offer "goto". Why? Because Larry Wall built Perl for himself, and he wanted the most powerful tool that he could conceive. That's exactly what Perl is.

And I accept that, and I really want that. Every time I mess up with Perl, I don't blame my tool. I just laugh out loud and exclaim: "Thanks, Larry, for letting me know another way to not be up to my job".

Perl is the magic wand. If you don't want to be a magician, you don't need it.

But if you want to be a magician, you'll be thrilled to know Perl has three forms of "goto", not just one. This is what the textbook says about the third one: "The goto &NAME form is highly magical and sufficiently removed from the ordinary goto to exempt its users from the opprobium to which goto users are customarily subjected".

You can also break from a loop from a subroutine.

  sub test() {last unless $_}
  for (1, 2, 0, 3) {
    print "$_\n";
    test;
  }
  // 1 2 0

I miss it :(

To me, having to be the compiler and have 100% test coverage for typos is a limit. TS is a lame, misguided attempt to correct that to let people keep using such limited languages for things.