On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 11:58:31 +0200, Juerd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) skribis 2005-06-10 9:32 (-0000): >> > > Interesting. Could you provide some more information, like perhaps a > message body?
My appologies, my news client crashed when I attempted to compose this. As you say it should have included a body. From my exprence with perl5 and from playing around with pugs I've noticed that when eval(Str $evalstring) is used I mostly use it like this (in perl5) eval "..."; Or eval <<"__EVALEND__"; ... __EVALEND__ It seems a natural analogy with s:e/.../.../; That I would be able to do the following. q:2:e/.../; q:2:e:to/__EVALEND__/; ... __EVALEND__; > I personally don't think string eval should be made too easy|simple. I would prefer a perl that didn't put speed bumps in the way just because it thought that it knew better. The old Unix tradition of "Don't prevent something stupid incase someone intelligent finds a clever use for it". -- Please excuse my spelling as I suffer from agraphia. See http://dformosa.zeta.org.au/~dformosa/Spelling.html to find out more. Free the Memes.
