>Thanks, I will add this to the next version. I did consider that, and
>I rejected it. Here's my thinking: s/successful// does make the
>feature somewhat more useful, but (a) all those uses are more easily
>accomplished with qr() these days, and (b) it's still an
>action-at-a-distance effect, which means that it's fragile and that
>the behavior of working code can change suddenly and surprisingly when
>it is modified.
I agree with your reasoning there. I just thought it should be
spelt out in the document, since it's a common first thought that
we've all had, but which we've not necessarily taken to its
conclusions.
thanks,
--tom
