On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 01:07:10 +0100, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>That's a bit harder since the cannonical subclassing...
>
>package Foo;
>@ISA = qw(Bar);
>
>is at run-time... from the point of view of the calling program.
>However, its compile-time to the module.
I'm pretty sure you
On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 03:58:51PM +0100, Piers Cawley wrote:
> You might want to see if you can spot places where @ISA gets messed
> with at runtime as well. Just a thought.
That's a bit harder since the cannonical subclassing...
package Foo;
@ISA = qw(Bar);
is at run-time... f
Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 04:46:21PM +0200, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
> > Why are you considering dynamic method calls an ill? I'm using them
> > frequently.
>
> I anticipated this. From the docs...
>
>Perl has alot of wierd features. We lo
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2001 16:03:51 +0100, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I anticipated this. From the docs...
>Perl has alot of wierd features. We love Perl for it, but
>it makes predictable refactorings really difficult. This
>module attempts to
On Sun, Apr 15, 2001 at 04:46:21PM +0200, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
> Why are you considering dynamic method calls an ill? I'm using them
> frequently.
I anticipated this. From the docs...
Perl has alot of wierd features. We love Perl for it, but
it makes predictable refactorings
> On Sun, 15 Apr 2001 14:38:47 +0100, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> It detects things like Autoloaders, eval STRING, goto LABEL, dynamic
> method calls, using non-exported variables and functions...
Why are you considering dynamic method calls an ill? I'm using them
frequ
Its been a long night.
If anyone didn't already see me make an ass out of myself about
C on p5p, this was all sparked
when japhy posted on FWP code that used that little "feature". Since
then I'd gotten it into my head that there must be some way to detect
that without actually running the c
