perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Philippe M. Chiasson" <go...@ectoplasm.org>
Subject Re: [MP2] possible pnotes bug?
Date Tue, 14 Mar 2006 02:01:21 GMT
Frank Wiles wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:35:45 -0500
> Geoffrey Young <geoff@modperlcookbook.org> wrote:
> 
>>I'm fine with fixing things in 2.0 if that's the majority consensus.

I'd certainly put my vote in that direction.

>>I'd have a really hard time doing anything that changes 1.0 behavior
>>at this point, though.

Oh, absolutely, 1.0 would stay as-is.

>>the bugfix that was just committed is a good example of things I
>>think we ought to be doing in 1.0 - something was clearly broken,
>>caused things to blow up, so we fix it.  but to alter some functinal
>>nuance simply because it doesn't feel right seems far beyond what we
>>can do to our 1.0, production userbase.

Agreed, unless it's some obvious, non-debatable breakeage/bug

>   I agree, it makes sense to change it in 2.0 and leave it alone in 1.0
>   provided we make it big, bold, and as idiot proof as possible in the
>   docs. :) 

The current state of documentation for this 'feature' in 2.0 is certainly
offputting for a mod_perl newbie, IMO

"
 Note: sharing variables really means it. The variable is not copied.
 Only its reference count is incremented. If it is changed after being
 put in pnotes that change also affects the stored value."


So does anybody think this behaviour shouldn't be 'fixed' in 2.0 ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippe M. Chiasson m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ GPG KeyID : 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/     F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3A5A5

Mime
View raw message