On 2012-06-03 at 19:17 +0100, Jeremy Harris wrote:
> I can see how it works, assuming that the substitutions can be
> made versatile enough to do whatever's needed. This particular case
> requires the removal of an entire line; is that possible without
> forcing perl to slurp the entire file rather than working line-by-line?
unless (exists $test_feature{'foo'}) {
next if /^line to be skipped$/;
}
> However, I'm concerned slightly that it's a negative test. While
> less work, it is more risky in that the new munge added to avoid
> byproducts of $new-feature (in cases not specifically testing $new-feature)
> get applied everywhere and could mistakenly mask some other problem.
> I'd be happier with a positive test and having to deliberately apply
> the munge only where it is identified as being needed, even though
> that's more work.
Invert the sense of the test. Trivial enough.
--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-dev Exim
details at http://www.exim.org/ ##
