Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from July 2013
On 11 July 2013 02:51, Father Chrysostomos via RT <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote: > On Wed Jul 10 13:15:12 2013, demerphq wrote: >> But I believe that the documentation in question is about field >> hashes, and not normal perl hashes, so it seems to me the question is >> irrelevant to answering this ticket. They seem like some kind of tie, >> and are definitely magic, so it seems to me they can do whatever they >> like. > > Field hashes are actually quite different from tied hashes. They are > regular perl hashes with extra magic attached to the elements to do some > extra bookkeeping behind the scenes. But that magic does not intercept > the regular store/fetch operations of plain hashes. > > In fact, the field hash magic is orthogonal to ties, so you can actually > tie a field hash. namespace::clean uses that. Be that as it may field hashes aren't normal hashes, and until someone carefully reviews the implementation I would assume that the documentation by the author is correct. Clearly there is *some* form of magic involved, the magic could do whatever it wants, including modifying the hash during traversal, which depending on how it was implemented *could* "throw the hash iterator". I stand by my claim that field hashes aren't normal hashes, and should not be expected to behave as them. It really doesn't matter if they are a true tie, or some other kind of magic hash, the fact is they are magic, and the only guarantees we make are about *non* magic hashes. So IMO field hashes can do whatever they like and all the commentary in this thread regarding the documentation of *true* perl hashes is irrelevant. Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next