Re: stronger than eval?

you can do this with UNIVERSAL::require

use UNIVERSAL::require;
unless ( "Cache::File"->use ) {
    print "error: $@";
}
[download]

Comment on Re: stronger than eval? Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: stronger than eval? by diotalevi (Canon) on Sep 21, 2006 at 19:18 UTC
do this with UNIVERSAL::require which no one should ever do. It pollutes the UNIVERSAL class which means it affects every class and every object. ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]
Re^3: stronger than eval? by mreece (Friar) on Sep 21, 2006 at 19:34 UTC
i agree with the second sentence, but not the first. ;-)	[reply]
Re^4: stronger than eval? by diotalevi (Canon) on Sep 21, 2006 at 19:38 UTC
So having unrelated objects all get a method that they might not wish to have added to them is ok with you? ⠤⠤ ⠙⠊⠕⠞⠁⠇⠑⠧⠊	[reply]
Re^5: stronger than eval? by mreece (Friar) on Sep 21, 2006 at 19:46 UTC
Re^6: stronger than eval? by perrin (Chancellor) on Sep 21, 2006 at 20:19 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^6: stronger than eval? by diotalevi (Canon) on Sep 21, 2006 at 20:13 UTC