On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 21:29:47 GMT, Dave Mitchell wrote: >On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 01:13:12PM -0800, Gurusamy Sarathy wrote: >> On Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:39:37 GMT, Dave Mitchell wrote: >> >> IMO, the original warnings are rather misguided, because they >> >> ass_u_me a particular intent which may not be (in fact most >> >> often isn't, given that most people aren't trying to do anything >> >> fancy with closures) true. It may be better to let these >> >> variables resolve as normal and let "use strict" do its thing. >> > >> >What is the thing that you want 'use strict' to do? >> >> Nothing it doesn't do already, i.e. fail with "Global symbol $x >> requires explicit package name ...". > >You've lost me here a bit, I'm afraid. The kind of code that generates the >closure warnings doesn't generate such 'global sym' messages under use >strict, eg I was talking about the case where there is an eval "sub { ... }" where the body of the sub references lexicals in the outer scope. I remember cases where such constructs used to trigger these warnings, but I can't seem to reproduce that anymore. Which means I'm probably going senile, and it may be safest to ignore me. Sarathy gsar@ActiveState.comThread Previous