Dan Sugalski writes: > Needless to say, this makes the optimizer's job... interesting. On the > other hand, it does allow for some really powerful things to be done by > code at runtime. The big thing I want it for is so I can write nats_settings.pm: # nats_settings.pm - turn on strict and warnings in caller magically_affect_my_caller_with { use strict; use warnings; }; then at the top of my programs I can write: use nats_settings; Nat
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Brent Dax
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Nathan Torkington
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Brent Dax
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Bryan C . Warnock
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Ken Fox
- Re: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Dan Sugalski
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Brent Dax
- RE: Should MY:: be a real symbol table? Sam Tregar