develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from December 2017

Re: [perl #132577] BBC Module::Install broken by0301e899536a22752f40481d8a1d141b7a7dda82

Thread Previous
Sawyer X
December 18, 2017 15:39
Re: [perl #132577] BBC Module::Install broken by0301e899536a22752f40481d8a1d141b7a7dda82
Message ID:

On 12/17/2017 09:17 PM, Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Dec 2017 03:06:01 -0800, wrote:
>> On 12/13/2017 12:04 AM, Leon Timmermans wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Leon Timmermans <
>>> <>> wrote:
>>>     On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 8:13 PM, Zefram <
>>>     <>> wrote:
>>>         However, as far as I can see there's no need at all for the
>>>         module to
>>>         delay execution of the code it generates by putting it in an
>>>         INIT block.
>>>         If that code is instead executed immediately, by deleting the
>>>         word "INIT"
>>>         to turn it into a bare block, everything works.  With that
>>>         alteration
>>>         to the module, the Module-Install distro passes its test suite.
>>>     Given Module::Install's rather unfortunate bundling nature, that
>>>     would require rereleasing all 119 distributions using it to be
>>>     rereleased with such a new Module::Install.
>>> Well, all 119 modules using Module::Install::DSL, Module::Install in
>>> general has quite a few more users.
>> That is indeed a pain.
> I seem to remember an old blog or list post by Michael Schwern predicting this very problem with Module::Install.
>> What is the cost of reverting this commit instead?
> Buggy, unpredictable behaviour, unless you can memorise the list of complex rules for when exit does and does not prevent other blocks from running.

Are you referring to long-term or immediate effect?

I'm wondering about temporary revert.

Thread Previous Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About