I'm using the Aegis CASE tool which uses a utility called fhist to perform merges. fhist uses the following marker to flag merge conflicts... /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ BEGIN CONFLICT /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ old conflicting code /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ new conflicting code /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ END CONFLICT /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ After cleaning up a bad merge I accidentally left one of these flags in my code... and it compiled! Turns out the flags are perfectly valid Perl (they do throw a warning) provided they appear at the end of a block or in some other way are terminated. { /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ END CONFLICT /-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/ } That's syntactically valid perl, even under strict. You can imagine my surprise. Even the CVS conflict marker... <<<<<<< Foo.pm is valid as long as there's three newlines after it (>>>>>>> and ======= are syntax errors), though it does throw lots of warnings. So I suppose the challenge here is to come up with a conflict marker that's most likely to cause a syntax error if it were to appear in Perl code, as well as boldly standing out and being easy to grep for. Don't forget about POD, strings and here-docs! -- Michael G. Schwern <schwern@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/ Perl6 Quality Assurance <perl-qa@perl.org> Kwalitee Is Job One Kids - don't try this at--oh, hell, go ahead, give it a whirl... ==== Want to unsubscribe from Fun With Perl? Well, if you insist... ==== Send email to <fwp-request@technofile.org> with message _body_ ==== unsubscribe