Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2003
On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 19:42:04 GMT, Dave Mitchell wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 11:19:52AM -0800, Gurusamy Sarathy wrote:
>> I'm not sure nextstate is the best place for this. Since this is
>> only needed once per scope, checking for it once-per-statement
>> seems like wasted cycles.
>>
>> Why not do it in the OP_LEAVE* ops? Or perhaps even introduce
>> a new OP_LEAVEMY that only fires if there are lexicals that
>> need to be finalized in that scope.
>
>Hmmm....
>
>A problem with an OP_LEAVEMY is that it often won't get called, eg
Good point. Might make more sense to make the OP_ENTER* ops
push savestack entries in block_end().
>Is there a way of ensuring that the op is always called no matter how the
>scope is unwound?
Not that I know of.
>Another option would be to insert an OP_STARTMY after each nextstate
>that preceeeded a my declaration ???
Seems kludgey for the cases where there is no nextstate preceding
the padsv.
Another way to approach it is to separate out the OP_PAD?V ops
and move them to execute at the beginning of the statement, sort
of as a preamble. This means transforming:
my ($x, $y) = ("xxx") if $z;
into the approximate equivalent of:
my ($x, $y), (($x, $y) = ("xxx") if $z);
(except that $x and $y have already been resolved as lexicals
when the succeeding ops are compiled).
It also means that this:
my $x if $bool;
would transform to:
my $x, ($x if $bool);
and could be optimized into:
my $x;
Sarathy
gsar@ActiveState.com
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next