On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 10:25:51AM +0200, Tels wrote:
> > After tinkering with B::Deparse for a bit, I think this particular
> > "oddity" may just be a result of poorly-written docs (or, more
> > probably, poorly-read on my part). The module seems to do the right
> > thing in all cases I could come up with (i.e., it only optimises out
> > truly-useless constants), so it should be safe to use for this
> > particular purpose. With this matter sorted, I've started on the code
> > and requisite tests to make the new stuff work.
>
> Just for clarification: this means that:
>
> is_deeply( sub { 1 + 2; }, sub { 3; } );
>
> should/will pass because the subs compile to the same code?
Yes, it will pass. "Should" is a matter for, largely academic, debate.
--
Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern
You are wicked and wrong to have broken inside and peeked at the
implementation and then relied upon it.
-- tchrist in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
