这是一篇谈论eval的好文章，以及它如何不是一种邪恶: http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2013/06/25/eval-isnt-evil-just-misunderstood/

I’m not saying you should go run out and start using eval() everywhere. In fact, there are very few good use cases for running eval() at all. There are definitely concerns with code clarity, debugability, and certainly performance that should not be overlooked. But you shouldn’t be afraid to use it when you have a case where eval() makes sense. Try not using it first, but don’t let anyone scare you into thinking your code is more fragile or less secure when eval() is used appropriately.

除非您100%确定正在评估的代码来自可信的来源(通常是您自己的应用程序)，否则这将使您的系统暴露于跨站点脚本攻击。

这是一篇谈论eval的好文章，以及它如何不是一种邪恶: http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2013/06/25/eval-isnt-evil-just-misunderstood/

I’m not saying you should go run out and start using eval() everywhere. In fact, there are very few good use cases for running eval() at all. There are definitely concerns with code clarity, debugability, and certainly performance that should not be overlooked. But you shouldn’t be afraid to use it when you have a case where eval() makes sense. Try not using it first, but don’t let anyone scare you into thinking your code is more fragile or less secure when eval() is used appropriately.

通常只有在传递eval用户输入时才会出现问题。

不恰当地使用eval会打开你的 注入攻击代码 调试可能更具挑战性 (没有行号等) 经过评估的代码执行速度较慢(没有机会编译/缓存经过评估的代码)

编辑:正如杰夫·沃尔登在评论中指出的那样，第三条在今天已经不像2008年那么正确了。然而，虽然可能会发生一些已编译脚本的缓存，但这将只局限于没有修改地重复计算的脚本。更可能的情况是，您正在计算的脚本每次都经历了轻微的修改，因此无法缓存。我们就说someeval代码执行得更慢。

这可能存在安全风险，它具有不同的执行范围，并且效率非常低，因为它为代码的执行创建了一个全新的脚本环境。更多信息请参见这里:eval。

不过，它非常有用，适度使用可以添加许多很好的功能。