On 23 Oct 2000, at 15:40, Peter Scott wrote:
> At 09:54 PM 10/23/00 +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> >On Mon, Oct 23, 2000 at 04:38:12PM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > > Runtime string eval, do, and require are a serious pain in the butt.
> > > They're the one set of things that'll force a real interpreter into a
> > program.
> >
> >*nodnod*. This is really tricky; if there's no eval in the program, we can
> >make all sorts of interesting optimizations: forego the whole SV process, and
> >just use ints and char*s and whatever. If there's an eval, you've got to throw
> >everything back into Perl-space, embed an interpreter, and all that jazz.
>
> What about introducing a pragma which either (a) promises not to use such
> things, or (b) throws an exception if the program does use such constructs,
> and say "if you want your programs to be compilable (or compile to
> something a heck of a lot lighter), say 'use strict "compilation"' or
> whatever"?
Hm, but such code (for non-trivial programs) will re-invent the wheel a
whole lot, won't it? Since "use" includes a "require". (On the other
hand, it's a require in a BEGIN block, so that may not be a problem
after all.)
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
