NeonEdge wrote on 2/21/01 4.07: ... >sense: could p6 allow (for the >first few versions anyway) a >"require <6;" directive? My ... This sounds to me like a good idea, especially if we implement some of the other radical changes, such as implicit 'use strict' or major changes to builtins. Personally I'd have it be 'use perl5' (it's the difference between making a new pragma and defining a third meaning for require [or redefining its current meaning]) but that's a minor detail. Unfortunately, it may be too late. Oh well... --Brent Dax Excuse typos, it's hahd to write on a Palm...
