Re^2: Redefining Imported Subs: of scope and no

You're confusing me!

Why do you always seem to ask me if you reply to someone else?

Please don't be surprised if I'm not replying.

And please don't simply change your posts after being proofed wrong in a reply.

> Where's the ability to flip the real say() back on?

Just swap no with use!

feature should be scoped (in this example file scoped), which makes much sense when debugging!

Otherwise the OP could (like already shown) do "use if" for testing a global constant like main::VERBOSE spreading all files.

Anyway manipulating say for debugging purpose is such a broken idea that I don't wanna invest more into this discussion... :)

Cheers Rolf

Comment on Re^2: Redefining Imported Subs: of scope and no Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Redefining Imported Subs: of scope and no by 7stud (Deacon) on Feb 09, 2013 at 17:08 UTC
And please don't simply change your posts after being proofed wrong in a reply. Huh? Where? What? Are you talking about the post where I congratulated you on such a simple solution? I didn't see where you 'proofed' that offering congratulations was wrong?	[reply]
Re^4: Redefining Imported Subs: of scope and no by LanX (Saint) on Feb 09, 2013 at 19:12 UTC
the one about "goatse getting into the wheels of your bike" or so in this post EDIT: you practically deleted everything I didn't quote in the reply. Cheers Rolf	[reply]