>Great insight, thanks. It's obvious that I'll have to do a lot more
>research before (possibly) resubmitting anything on this subject. I do
>like the idea of at least being able to fiddle with input source
>tainting (since this is what usually gets me, even if I know the input
>source is safe). D
Larry-
Great insight, thanks. It's obvious that I'll have to do a lot more
research before (possibly) resubmitting anything on this subject. I do
like the idea of at least being able to fiddle with input source
tainting (since this is what usually gets me, even if I know the input
source is safe)
Nathan Wiger writes:
: Is there any interest to do this in the community with tainting? Adding
: a 'use tainting' to Perl 6 (or 5.7, for that matter)?
Unfortunately, tainting is a data-flow/data-typing concept, and when
you try to implement data-flow/data-typing concepts with lexical
scopes, you
> >Warnings and Tainting should be reimplemented as pragmas.
>
> What part of warnings(3) and perllexwarn(1) are you in disagreement with?
Not yet fully-versed on everything having todo with 5.6, appears I made
a bit of an oversight (i.e., as you mention 'use warnings' is already in
5.6)! So wh
>Wanted to get this out as an idea that could encompass lots of the
>concerns I'm seeing about warnings and such:
>=head1 TITLE
>Warnings and Tainting should be reimplemented as pragmas.
What part of warnings(3) and perllexwarn(1) are you in disagreement with?
--tom
Wanted to get this out as an idea that could encompass lots of the
concerns I'm seeing about warnings and such:
=head1 TITLE
Warnings and Tainting should be reimplemented as pragmas.
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Nathan Wiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2 Aug 2000
Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: perl6-
