http://qs321.pair.com?node_id=438520


in reply to Should chomping a constant always raise an error?

Does it make sense to anyone else that chomp tests and carps about receiving a read-only parameter, before it tests whether it would require modification?

Yes. It is well documented that chomp only works if you give an lvalue to work with.

I don't want to sound cruel but you want to modify core functionality for a very specific edge case. Good luck getting it implemented.

It's easier to go with what works. Use a temporary variable if you think that someone will pass you a constant.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Should chomping a constant always raise an error?
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Mar 11, 2005 at 03:35 UTC

    I had no intention of modifying core functionality. I just got surprised by it.


    Examine what is said, not who speaks.
    Silence betokens consent.
    Love the truth but pardon error.
    Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco.

      Fair enough. I must have read more into your OP.