[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: define issues

From: Philip Guenther
Subject: Re: define issues
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:55:08 -0700

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> Maybe we should just improve the documentation to better explain what
> $(eval) does and how, so that even non-experts will see the light.
> What is missing from the current docs that you think should be there
> (and I don't mean the warning to stay away)?

Double-evaluation in various languages has been a source of bugs and
security holes for years, but you don't think people should be warned
away from this?

"Here folks, see how cleanly this slices your fingers off?   Ain't it
great!?!  Oh, and the results are completely unlike normal makefiles
and unmaintainable by the people who follow you!  Perfect job
security, assuming you keep your job after you've lost your fingers!"

For myself, I'm not experienced enough in its use to make a
recommendation about how it should be used; I *don't* think it should
be removed, but I'm not going to use it until it's the last resort.
I've dealt with double-eval crap in enough other languages to be able
to see where the problems lie in someone else's usage, but mostly to
not want to go there.

Philip Guenther

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]