Hi >> Yes but if you've said "use assertions qw/destructors layerIII/" and >> then -Adestructors, your assertions won't be asserted. No ? I just feel >> that the interface is not very flexible. > > > yes, I agree, but I didn't want to create a mini language for assertions > in order to keep it simple. Maybe it is the way to go and you should be > able to use something like > > use assertions '(This && (is || my) || assertion) && filter' I have implemented it, well formed logical expressions composed of '&&', '||', '(', ')', '1', '0' and keywords can be used. use assertions 'foo && bar'; use assertions 1; use assertions '(foo && bar) || (foo1 || bar1 && foo2)'; And the old fashion implicit 'and' is still available use assertions qw|foo bar|; I have also substituted the ugly '&' hack to use the current status in the selection for '_' use assertions 'foo'; use assertions '_ && bar'; is equivalent to use assertions 'foo && bar'; so you can use '_' in any place inside the logical expressions. Finally, I have also changed '-A' switch to insert '.*' when used alone. Bye, - Salva