perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <s...@stason.org>
Subject Re: cvs commit: modperl ToDo
Date Sat, 02 Sep 2000 09:43:14 GMT
> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:46:46 -0700 (PDT), Doug MacEachern <dougm@covalent.net>
said:
> 
>   > perhaps, i've cc'd andreas who originally chose -M, i have the feeling we
>   > discussed the reasons ages ago.  andreas, do you see any reason not to use
>   > (stat _)[9] instead of -M _ ?
>  
> I'm falling aslep while I write, so please forgive me if I say
> something stupid...
> 
> You cannot change between -M _ and (stat _)[9] without inverting the
> comparison function too. If you watch a file's mtime within a perl
> program, -M _ will get smaller (and below zero) while (stat _)[9] will
> get bigger. So if you check for <= now, this would become >=

true.

> Otherwise I see no strong reason to use one or the other. I kind of
> like -M here because it's shorter to read/write and it's a smaller
> number and easier to compare visually. But, of course, it's risky if
> somebody plays with $^T, then they can break -M by action at a
> distance while they cannot break the stat thing.

Especially when the guide endorses playing with $^T, when one wants to get
a correct -M relative to the request start time and not the process start. 

_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman              JAm_pH     --   Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/       mod_perl Guide  http://perl.apache.org/guide 
mailto:stas@stason.org   http://apachetoday.com http://jazzvalley.com
http://singlesheaven.com http://perlmonth.com   perl.org   apache.org



Mime
View raw message