Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from June 2016
This new example looks even more like a bug:
http://pastebin.com/XtFk7bKs
(Code also appears below.)
-John
#!/usr/local/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
package Dummy;
sub new { bless {}, shift }
sub throw_error {
die 'Died in throw_error';
}
sub DESTROY {
eval { };
}
package DummyContainer;
sub new { bless {}, shift }
sub add_things {
my ($self, $things) = @_;
$things->[0]->throw_error();
}
package main;
use Test::More tests => 1;
eval {
my $dummy = Dummy->new();
my $dummy_container = DummyContainer->new([]);
$dummy_container->add_things([$dummy]);
1;
};
like($@, qr/Died in throw_error/, 'exception thrown in eval is visible');
---
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Zefram <zefram@fysh.org> wrote:
> Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> >Does this thread constitute a case where it matters sufficiently to
> >change it?
>
> Yes. To have a reliable $@ value immediately after eval is important,
> and the programmer can't be expected to anticipate which things might
> be mortalised and so capable of clobbering it.
>
> However, one doesn't necessarily have to solve this by generally changing
> the timing of temp freeing. Another option is to save and restore $@
> around temp freeing. It's not obvious which of these would perform
> better. There may also be some option of changing timing just for eval,
> which if possible would almost certainly have the best performance.
>
> -zefram
>
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next