Damian Conway wrote: >Luke Palmer wrote: > >>Ooh! Why don't we have a dont command! With several variants: >> dont FILE >> dont BLOCK >> >>dont { print "Boo" } >> >>Would print: >> >> > >You really *should* be more careful what you wish for Luke. >The following was just uploaded to the CPAN... > >Damian > > >-----cut----------cut----------cut----------cut----------cut----------cut----- > >NAME > Acme::Don't - The opposite of `do' > >VERSION > This document describes version 1.00 of Acme::Don't, released May 1, > 2002. > >SYNOPSIS > use Acme::Don't; > > don't { print "This won't be printed\n" }; # NO-OP > >DESCRIPTION > The Acme::Don't module provides a `don't' command, which is the opposite > of Perl's built-in `do'. > > >AUTHOR > Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > >BLAME > Luke Palmer really should be *far* more careful what he idly wishes for. > >BUGS > Unlikely, since it doesn't actually do anything. However, bug reports > and other feedback are most welcome. > >
feature request : Acme::Dont::Obstruct We need a dont that will prevent *bad things*, to wit: dont ( 'let MS get away with it'); dont ( 'rape the planet'); dont ( 'sack ANWAR'); dont ( 'accept Bushs Energy Plan'); dont ('pass CBTBPTA*%#$'); in this light, your *impressive* module has the shortcoming that it cant stop stuff when its not used. Ex: W was able to hold secret energy meetings with the oil industry, w/o the participation of *any* environmental groups. Shades of Hillarys health plan that was pilloried. Wheres the uproar now ? Now the real trick will be getting this module to insert itself into code w/o explicit 'use' stuff it into universal ?? can you make a module that can do that ? huh ? huh ?