Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2022
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 4:59 PM Ovid <curtis_ovid_poe@yahoo.com> wrote: > On Friday, 14 January 2022, 15:54:27 CET, Leon Timmermans < > fawaka@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > But those assumptions are basically broken, so I'm not sure your > point. Classic case of GIGO. > > > > It's not broken if it gets the job done, is it? > > > I agree with you that the new behavior is far more usable than the older > behavior, but that doesn't > > mean people haven't put the old behavior to use. > > I think the old behavior kind of worked because generally, stack traces > work. It appears to be the use/require case which is problematic. > > However, in the use/require case, if the apparently pseudo-random ordering > is deterministic, on my machine the first stack frame grabbed happens to be > correct. If that holds (pretty sure it must), then for the 'import' case > where you're trying to figure out where you're exporting to, you're going > to export those functions to the right spot. It's when you hit stack traces > that it becomes an unusable mess. > > As it stands: > > * The stack trace is clearly incorrect > * That makes it useless for debugging > * When you're working on a *huge* system and get those traces, it's > miserable > > Given that, I suspect the most useful discussions are about *how* to fix > it and/or *when* to fix it. > "How to fix it" probably includes people stepping up to deal with the fallout. IME the most useful thing proponents of this change could do is actually write patches for the 3 known affected modules. I don't really understand how that hasn't happened yet in the past two years. LeonThread Previous | Thread Next