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.
