Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2012
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Leon Timmermans <fawaka@gmail.com> wrote:
> POSIX has the %SIGRT hash for a couple of years now (3609ea0d), but
> I'm not sure it should. I'm not sure what the purpose of it is
> exactly, it's pretty much %SIG except that it uses unsafe signals.
> Also, it uses its own *undocumented* key naming scheme (which makes me
> suspect it's not being used at all), written in perl4 style and rather
> buggy.
>
> Quite frankly I don't see how anyone could make a working program with
> this. I feel it'd be best to deprecate it.
The docs have fairly strong caveat:
NOTE: whether POSIX realtime signals really work in your
system, or whether Perl has been compiled so that it works with
them, is outside of this discussion.
There is so much in POSIX.pm that doesn't work portably or that the
docs say shouldn't actually be used, that I don't see any reason to
deprecate this particular piece. If it's really dangerous, the doc
warning could be strengthened, possibly by referring them to perlipc
which discusses the use of safe signals (and potential risks of unsafe
signals).
Put differently, does the ability of a user to enable unsafe signals
actually interfere with something else that needs doing/fixing? (And
if so, what about PERL_SIGNALS?) Or is the core of your objection a
stylistic one? I completely respect a stylistic objection (I might
even agree with it), but don't think that clears the bar for
deprecation, given the options we give people for shooting themselves
in the foot already.
-- David
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next