in reply to Re^3: Exiting eval via next: is that so bad?
in thread Exiting eval via next: is that so bad?

In my mind, this wasn't a new question, it was a continuation of a discussion I'd found. Isn't the idea of searching first to avoid starting new questions when reasonably possible?

Anyway, thanks for your suggestion of the "no warnings" pragma.

  • Comment on Re^4: Exiting eval via next: is that so bad?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Exiting eval via next: is that so bad?
by Anonymous Monk on Oct 18, 2011 at 11:00 UTC

    Isn't the idea of searching first to avoid starting new questions when reasonably possible?

    No, the idea is to find answers to your own questions :)

    If the old thread doesn't answer your question, you create a new one, and say:

    I got this question ... saw this old related thread ( [id://104789] ), but it doesn't answer my question exactly

     

    In my mind, this wasn't a new question, it was a continuation of a discussion I'd found.

    This is common , but consider the dates.

    Hofmator, whom you asked a question, hasn't visited perlmonks in 5 years.

    The discussion you continued is 10+ years old.

    Sure any one of the perlmonks could notice your node and reply, but only Hofmator is guaranteed to notice, if he returns and has /msg me when a reply arrives turned on:) and as you've noticed, it isn't the same as asking all the perlmonks for help, all you got was me :)

    necromancy tends to fly under the radar , I try to hunt for these things :)

Re^5: Exiting eval via next: is that so bad?
by jdporter (Canon) on May 05, 2012 at 01:25 UTC

    Pay no attention to the troll behind the mask.

      Pay no attention to the troll behind the mask.

      Its not like the troll answered the OPs question 6 months ago

      Its not like it took jdporter 6 months to notice

      Whos the troll?