Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2009
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Eric Brine <ikegami@adaelis.com> wrote: > If the scalar is tied or has other magic it could be bad to delay its >> destructor, > > > I must have been tired, but I forgot magic had destructors. I may have > underestimated the impact. I definitely understated it. >> > - Don't fix until a better solution is found. >> >> I wouldn't mind knowing a way to identify scalars held alive like this, >> so as to excuse them from Test::Weaken or similar leak checking. >> > > Since TARG variables are stored in the pad, you could go through the pad > looking for PVLVs that have associated variables. It may not be the perfect > answer (any maybe you can refine it by looking at the flags), but it should > be a very good heuristic. 1: are there situations where a RAIL object will be the subject of one of these functions? (resource acquisition is locking is the big design pattern that relies on timely destruction) 2: can TARG be a weak reference using current weak reference technology? That was mentioned earlier in this thread, and seems from a high and distant level to be the way to go. What's wrong with that suggestion? When does TARG hold the last reference to something, and if never, can TARG manipulation stuff simply leave reference counts alone? -- "In the case of an infinite collection, the question of the existence of a choice function is problematic"Thread Previous | Thread Next