Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2000
On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 06:07:07PM +0100, "Alan Burlison" wrote:
> Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > > Shouldn't tie magic be disabled when retrieving from the array
> > > 'underneath' a tie? Unless this is done, self-ties cannot ever work.
> > That would stop A-tiedto-B-tiedto-C working, surely?
> > [But is A-tiedto-B-tiedto-C desirable?]
> I was thinking of something like:
> disable_magic(sv)
> real_sv = sv_mortalcopy(sv);
> enable_magic(sv);
> This should still allow nested magic to work, but should stop the
> recursion.
Except it would break threading. :-)
> > Is there anywhere for pp_tie to flag an object as active, so if you come
> > back to it via a loop (A-tiedto-A or anything more complex) it doesn't
> > use the tie method for a second (third (fourth (...))) trip?
> That seems like the only workable fix. However, I have no idea where
> such a flag should go, and how to 'unwind' it when the tied access has
> finished. Personally I'd be content just to see self-ties and tie loops
> made illegal. However, at the moment the position WRT the supportedness
> of self-ties is unclear.
if (magical && ! sv_exists_in_thread_specific_magical_stack)
...
mark
--
markm@nortelnetworks.com/mark@mielke.cc/markm@ncf.ca __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | SIR Tools (7H12)
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ | Nortel Networks
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
Thread Previous