Hacker News Reader

Comment by mijoharas | Hacker News Reader

My biggest question about this is did the guy not understand why the flag was called `MONKEY-SEE-NO-EVAL`? Because that name was my favourite part of the article...

View on HN

I think that the author does get the pun; they made another of a similar calibre in the title of the post!

Their main objection to the pragma would seem to be the MONKEY-SEE-NO-EVAL name; if you don't understand the reference, say you're a non-native speaker, or just have no idea what it's referring to, all you'll see is "NO-EVAL", and then get confused why the code suddenly allows EVAL everywhere. Levity and fun is perfectly acceptable, but is it just as acceptable when the language is less obvious for it's extended developer community?

For other people who don't understand either:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_wise_monkeys

The article is called "The root of all eval." I think the author gets it.

To me it looks like the author is oblivious of the pun in MOKNEY-SEE-NO-EVAL, even though he made the same pun in the title.

I don't think it's possible to be a Perl 6 core developer and not get basic puns like this. #perl6 is nothing if not a series of puns mixed with code.

His point is merely that either this is a seriously bad idea that you should never do, in which case you should not attempt to communicate it through a silly pun, or it is acceptable, in which case it shouldn't be hidden behind a compiler pragma.

Yes it's cool but maybe not everybody gets the drift. That and the fact that Perl6 error messages are really meaningful as in not a wordplay on a reference to sanzaru.

Just learned that the 3 wise monkeys are called Sanzaru. Thanks!

If that's your biggest question, then what did you think "weird attempt at levity" referred to?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com