|Think about Loose Coupling|
Re^15: eval to replace die?by BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Oct 09, 2010 at 10:09 UTC||Need Help??|
Alright, i'll give it one more try to see if i can get through to you.
There is no need for you to "try to get through" to me. I understand what you (and others) are saying. I just disagree with your conclusions, and I've tried (hard) to present my reasoning in detail. You can either accept or reject my reasoning, but re-stating your flawed position over again will not change my reasoning, nor my conclusions.
You completely miss the crucial difference between a simple string comparison and a regex to deparse something.
No I didn't. But you apparently didn't read half my post, because it you had you have read the bit where I showed that there is no good reason to "deparse" the error string.
"Exhibit one" fully rebutted!
Have you even tried that
Of course I did, but the synopsis code, all in a single file, is not useful. So I tried and posted a realistic example. It doesn't work:
I invited corrections, none were forthcoming.
My example is a cut-down version of the synopsis, with some things changed
And the things you changed mean that you're not using half of the functionality of the module. You don't use either of the ->throw() or the ->caught() methods. You use Try::Tiny for this functionality, presumably because you couldn't get them to work either.
(Hint: Appeal to popularity is a fallacy.)
Statements of verifiable fact are not "appeals to popularity"; and by definition, cannot be "fallacy".
Do you think Justin Bieber ...
Further restatements of our respective positions serve no purpose. Let's just accept that you think I'm an idiot; and I think that you are too caught up in trying to suggest that I am, to have bothered to read what I've written and make any real attempt to apply logic to it.
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.