On Tuesday, 6 August 2024 at 09:27, Benjamin Außenhofer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 06.08.2024, 09:43:21 schrieb Benjamin Außenhofer <[email protected]>:
>
>> - If it still does not allow me to set exit as disabled_functions, then this creates an
>> inconsistency
>
> That left me wondering why disabled_functions does not work, and I see the PR adds a special
> case for both functions. So disabling them „could“ potentially work.
Indeed, as it would be a true function and disabling it would work as expected, as initially I did
permit disabling it but I decided that might be a bit too weird for people.
In fact one could even redefine it after disabing it (like any other internal function).
It might be a bit harder to support redefining it after it has been disabled now that the
implementation is at the parser level (as various people prefered).
In any case, ant technical issue that eval() was having are non-existing here.
Best regards,
Gina P. Banyard