Although let me say that I agree with false being the default. I'm not saying that is a bad idea, only that we need to be careful if evaling what comes over... but I guess that is obvious and if not then we get what we deserve. ;-)
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 12:23 PM, Michael Fogus <mefo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> RuntimeException EvalReader not allowed when *read-eval* is false. > > The problem is that the second eval gets (<the actual + function> 1 2 > 3) which invokes the right pathway triggering the exception. You can > trigger the same exception by: > > (binding [*read-eval* false] (eval (list + 1 2 3))) > > People are not sending actual functions across the wire, so the only > way to trigger this is to do some kind of pre-processing of symbols to > functions or perhaps: > > (binding [*read-eval* false] (eval '(eval (quote (+ 1 2 3))))) > ;;=> 6 > > Whoops! > > Maybe setting *read-eval* to false is not enough. -- -- http://blog.fogus.me -- http://github.com/fogus -- -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
