Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2017
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 03:07:47PM +0100, Christian Walde wrote: > On Mon, 27 Feb 2017 14:56:23 +0100, Sawyer X <xsawyerx@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>The point has been raised by haarg and leont that that might not be > >>>entirely straight-forward due to shared code between use/require, but i > >>>think in this case backwards compatibiliy should trump, even if the core > >>>code looks a little more ugly as a result. > >>Although I lean towards the backwards compatility camp, note that we can't > >>provide *exact* backcompat even if we wanted to: the old behaviour of do() > >>was strictly to search @INC, and @INC just happened often to have '.' as > >>its last member. > >> > >>The most obvious backcompat strategy is to make 'do' always treat @INC as > >>having an implicit trailing '.' when loading a 'do' file; but this will > >>mean that code which explicitly removed '.' from @INC for security or > >>other reasons will suddenly have 'do' loading files from locations it > >>previously wouldn't have. > > > >This is why I believe a warning would be useful here instead. > > And correction of the documentation, which was only correct for 99% of cases before, but after '.' removal would be correct for only 1%. I merged my doc patch from rt#130832 at the weekend. This should make the documentation consistent with current behaviour. Of course, it would need a further tweak if warnings were to be added. Dominic.Thread Previous | Thread Next