perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Larry Leszczynski <>
Subject Re: a new directive: PerlStartupFile?
Date Fri, 10 Dec 2004 17:55:47 GMT
Hi Stas -

> As a followup to the discussed issue, we need to redefine the concept of:
>    "put those things in"
> we now need to say:
>     "put those things in post_config phase handler"
> So there is a possibility to introduce a new directive: PerlStartupFile
> (feel free to suggest a better name) which will be:
> PerlStartupFile ""
> after discussing this with gozer on irc we aren't sure this is a good
> idea, as for most people using the old concept will still work.

Leaving things as-is sounds like it might be asking for trouble, e.g.
people not aware of the implications between config and post-config, or
people still using "PerlRequire" from their mp1 setup and it
works ok by coincidence, and suddenly stops working (or fails in
mysterious ways) when they add something that unknowingly breaks the rules
about config vs. post-config phases.

Maybe it would also help to introduce an alias for PerlRequire called
something like PerlConfigFile, to make it more obvious it should only be
used to modify config, and recommend that instead of using "PerlRequire" people should do:

   PerlConfigFile  ""
   PerlStartupFile ""

Or maybe since there is already PerlPostConfigHandler, parallel that and
use the name PerlPostConfigFile instead of PerlStartupFile?:

   PerlConfigFile     ""
   PerlPostConfigFile ""

(Don't know about that, maybe PerlStartupFile seems more intuitive about
what you'd use it for...)

Larry Leszczynski

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message