* Peter Scott ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [08 Aug 2000 07:14]: [...] > If the only realistic case you want to catch is an empty file, why not > just check for that and issue an error? Easier than everyone in the > world having to stick 1; at the end of their .pm (who's forgotten it, > now? Hands up...) A call to people: Who here has actually used something other than a constant '1' in a package? If so, why? (Possibly cite the code.) cheers, -- iain truskett, aka Koschei. <http://eh.org/~koschei/> "I'd just like to take this opportunity to say: Iain Truskett, you are a scheming Swine!" -- Erik Pollitt, The Barmy Army, 20000621.
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove require... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove req... John Porter
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remov... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement... Piers Cawley
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement... Andy Wardley
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement for fina Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement for fina Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement for... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement... Peter Scott
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove require... iain truskett
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove req... Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove req... Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove req... William Setzer
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remov... iain truskett
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove req... Damian Conway
- Re: RFC 55 (v1) Compilation: Remove requirement for... Damian Conway