>>>>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:27:28 +0200, Marc Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 02:05:38PM +0100, Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On the subject of untaint, I remember Larry specifically saying that he
>> did not add such a thing to perl as something like that should be difficult
>> to do.
> I know. Maybe the mix of often-used-functions (utf8_*??) and rarely-used
> functions (untaint) was not the best idea.
> OTOH, what did he mean by that? Maybe that perl should not include untaint
> because it would be too easy to find if it were part of the core language?
> Then the module should hide it good enough (at leats for the moment).
> Would you be happier when I added a BIG WARNING (and/or make it
> non-exportable)? Or would you really, really prefer if I took out that
> function entirely? You certainly could talk me into doing that ;)
I'd say, go find the other untainting module and use that. If it
really doesn't exist, I know that mod_perl ships with soemthing like
that.
On the utf8 stuff I can say that recent discussions on the Perl
Conference made it very obvious that most of it is broken and anything
you put in a module now will not work over the long run. So maybe
better keep that module somewhat private or give it a short lifetime
in the manpage.
--
andreas
