On Mon, Jul 24, 2000 at 02:05:38PM +0100, Graham Barr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On the subject of untaint, I remember Larry specifically saying that he
> did not add such a thing to perl as something like that should be difficult
> to do.
I know. Maybe the mix of often-used-functions (utf8_*??) and rarely-used
functions (untaint) was not the best idea.
OTOH, what did he mean by that? Maybe that perl should not include untaint
because it would be too easy to find if it were part of the core language?
Then the module should hide it good enough (at leats for the moment).
Would you be happier when I added a BIG WARNING (and/or make it
non-exportable)? Or would you really, really prefer if I took out that
function entirely? You certainly could talk me into doing that ;)
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
