It was Friday, August 08, 2003 when Brian McCauley took the soap box, saying: : Casey West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: : : > I think it should not mention eval() either. This would encourage use : > of a terrible idea. It's neat, yes, but terrible. The FAQ entry is : > fine as is. : : The FAQ workers mailing list is not the place for this sort of debate. : : We had've had the debate over in comp.lang.perl.* many times. The "this : would encourage use of a terrible idea" argument has been put forward : and rebutted repeatedly. : : Last time the debate raged over there, pretty much everyone, including : brian d foy, the then FAQ maintainer, was in agreement that this FAQ : entry was seriously flawed and needed a re-write so that it actually : gave the honest answer the question.
I maintain that I'd rather remove the question from the FAQ than have the answer expanded to include more poor coding practices. Casey West -- Shooting yourself in the foot with Scheme As Lisp, but none of the other appendages are aware of this happening.
