Eirik Berg Hanssen wrote: > Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> chromatic wrote: >>> On Thursday 01 March 2007 17:46, Adam Kennedy wrote: >>> >>>> Actually, isn't UNIVERSAL::can($x, 'can') still valid? I seem to >>>> remember that at one point it was considered the only valid use of >>>> UNVERSAL::can directly. >>> That's the only case I can think of too. >> Hmm, that's a clever way of determining if something is an object. >> >> I guess UNIVERSAL::isa($thing, "UNIVERSAL") works, too. And >> UNIVERSAL::can($thing, "isa"). > > Not so if your $thing is a non-object sting that happens to be a > package name ...
Oh yeah. I guess it would have to be C<< ref $thing && UNIVERSAL::isa($thing, "UNIVERSAL") >>. And the first person to point out it doesn't work if $thing is blessed into class "0" gets their face dunked in pancake batter and fried.
