Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2017
On Fri, 10 Mar 2017 02:16:13 -0800, LeonT wrote:
> Destructors can and do depend on package variables, this would not solve
> all non-circular cases.
Right, but it would solve a large class of cases. Also note that Perl seems to do the right thing for "my" variables with package scope. Only for "our" variables, it seems impossible to get a sane destruction order. If you run the program below, $my1 if always destroyed before $my2, regardless of initialization order. But "our" variables are always destroyed in the DESTRUCT phase without taking references between objects into account.
> The proper solution would be to topologically sort the objects and then
> destroy them in that order (ideally even taking into account that the
> destruction can add new nodes to the graph), but this is non-trivial to
> implement and to execute; and obviously would still not solve circular
> references.
Just because a solution isn't perfect doesn't mean that it shouldn't be implemented. Anyway, I'm only asking to acknowledge that this bug isn't fixed and to reopen it.
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
package TestObj;
sub new {
my ( $class, $name ) = @_;
return bless { name => $name }, $class;
}
sub set_ref {
my ( $self, $ref ) = @_;
$self->{ref} = $ref;
}
sub DESTROY {
my $self = shift;
print "Destroying $self->{name}, phase is ${^GLOBAL_PHASE}\n";
}
my $my1 = TestObj->new('my1');
my $my2 = TestObj->new('my2');
$my1->set_ref($my2);
our $our1 = TestObj->new('our1');
our $our2 = TestObj->new('our2');
$our1->set_ref($our2);
---
via perlbug: queue: perl5 status: resolved
https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=32714
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next