Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ogicse!orstcs!usenet!sapphire!pvo
From: pvo@sapphire.OCE.ORST.EDU (Paul O'Neill)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.perl
Subject: Re: can we ever compile perl?
Message-ID: <1990Dec13.034336.21769@usenet@scion.CS.ORST.EDU>
Date: 13 Dec 90 03:43:36 GMT
References: <275E7B47.2EB9@tct.uucp> <STEF.90Dec7130410@zweig.exodus> <9592:Dec920:40:5190@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <110306@convex.convex.com>
Sender: @usenet@scion.CS.ORST.EDU
Reply-To: pvo@sapphire.OCE.ORST.EDU (Paul O'Neill)
Organization: Coastal Imaging Lab, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR
Lines: 25
Nntp-Posting-Host: sapphire.oce.orst.edu

In article <110306@convex.convex.com> tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:
>    ..............
>    eval "s/$find/$repl/g";
>    ................
>

Gee, I've always glossed over this eval stuff.  Now that I'm paying attention
I'm befuddled.  Why is the eval needed, Tom?

Why does the substitution 1/2 work w/o the eval?  The $find is parsed and
found but the $repl gets shoved in literally.  I just hate it when I don't
have a model that will predict code's behavior and have to "just try it" to
see what it does.

>Notice that I've used not one but two evals in this little program.

Boy, I am dense.  Where's the other one?

Thanks.


Paul O'Neill                 pvo@oce.orst.edu		DoD 000006
Coastal Imaging Lab
OSU--Oceanography
Corvallis, OR  97331         503-737-3251