> Yes, I got that, and I even kind of like it. It's the idea that thisSee my comment below.
> might work as a "temp sub", rather than a "my sub", that I'm not at
> all sanguine about.
> Why, it's almost surely bad even for your sample scenario! ImagineCode like that (which relies on the poorly specified standard values of
> what might happen inside &DBI::execute if the values of boolean ops
> change globally. You'll break simple stuff like:
> @socket[$hostname eq 'localhost']
truth and falsehood) *deserves* to break. See me argument at the end of
> Yes, if you somehow manage to fix numification you'll be OK with thisI *thoroughly* agree. I totally agree.
> specific case, but I hope the principle is clear: Lexical overrides
> good, global overrides bad^Wextremely hazardous.
But that won't stop me from telling people how to do bad things when they ask. ;-)
BTW, I would strongly argue that Perl ought to have a *proper* boolean type.
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.