You have I how often that would have been useful. It's a great
> exception safety mechanism... like C++'s "resource aquisition is
> initialization" thingy, but without having to write a class for every
> variable.
Have you already forgotten KEEP and UNDO (that we introduced in A4/E4):
our $
> Page 13 tells use about C decls. But it also says that the topic must
> be a regex. Whilst it explains that this isn't really a problem, I'm not
> sure that it justifies it. So perhaps someone can clarify why this
> (hypothetical) code in not a reasonable generalization:
Because Perl code doesn
You have I how often that would have been useful. It's a great
exception safety mechanism... like C++'s "resource aquisition is
initialization" thingy, but without having to write a class for every
variable.
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, David Whipp wrote:
> Page 13 tells use about C decls. But it als
Page 13 tells use about C decls. But it also says that the topic must
be a regex. Whilst it explains that this isn't really a problem, I'm not
sure that it justifies it. So perhaps someone can clarify why this
(hypothetical) code in not a reasonable generalization:
our $foo = 0;
sub do_somethin
