Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2010
On Aug 2, 2010, at 2:34 AM, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> That's why there's all the "extra" code to allow hashes to store backreferences
> in the hv_aux structure. I believe that that's the logical place to hang any
> extra data needed for this.
If you are suggesting adding new fields to the xpvhv_aux struct, what do I need to know about alignment issues?
(After doing some research, it now looks as though I just need one more field; viz., a HEK* to store an alternate name.)
> Also, if it's easier to implement, I don't see a problem with using the global
> sub generation counter to flag when someone has directly manipulated the tree
> of stashes.
Doesn’t that just affect method caches? What about isa caches?
Looking through the isa code, I haven’t yet seen anything that checks PL_sub_generation, but I may have missed it.
If PL_sub_generation does not invalidate isa caches, would it be appropriate to add a new PL_isa_generation variable?
> It's not common, and I don't see an absolute need to calculate the
> strict set of packages affected, and call mro_changed_in() for just them.
And I now realise that such would be very inefficient anyway, as nested classes have nothing to do with inheritance. (*p:: = *PPI:: would have to iterate through 94 packages, recalculating the linear isa cache, etc. *p:: = delete $::{"PPI"} would do that iteration twice.)
Father Chrysostomos
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next