Re: [PATCH] Re: Is it a Bug? ($c .= "5") . "6"

On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 12:12:20AM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> > ok(), but what's wrong with (;$@) ? :-)
> 
> I don't see (intuitively ;-) what ok() means. And I might remember
> some parsing oddities that have been "resolved" by adding prototypes
> to Test::ok and Test::More::ok.

I was irritated by 'ok' not printing (in many, many cases) its second
argument for failed matches - I didn't want to change the way it could
be used.

$yes = "";
...
eval "... ok($yes) ...";

I agree this is not realistic - so go for '$@' -

Regards,
Adi