coke (>): > I was unable to test this: > > #RT #115506 > eval_lives_ok > "macro pathological { AST.new }; pathological();", > "macro returning AST.new doesn't blow up"; > > fails with: > > prove -v -e t/fudgeandrun t/spec/S06-macros/errors.tt/spec/S06- > macros/errors.t .. > 1..1 > not ok 1 - macro returning AST.new doesn't blow up > # Error: Missing block > # Looks like you failed 1 tests of 1
Double-quoted "" strings interpolate {} blocks. So I don't think the first argument to eval_lives_ok means what you think it means. I've done the same thinko myself a number of times.