perl-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Philippe M. Chiasson" <go...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r807116 - in /perl/modperl/trunk: Changes lib/Apache2/Build.pm lib/ModPerl/BuildMM.pm lib/ModPerl/MM.pm
Date Mon, 24 Aug 2009 20:40:37 GMT
On 24/08/09 15:54 , Fred Moyer wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Torsten
> Foertsch<torsten.foertsch@gmx.net> wrote:
>> On Mon 24 Aug 2009, Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
>>>> Modified: perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm
>>>> URL:
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.p
>>>> m?rev=807116&r1=807115&r2=807116&view=diff
>>>> ===================================================================
>>>> =========== --- perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm (original)
>>>> +++ perl/modperl/trunk/lib/Apache2/Build.pm Mon Aug 24 08:29:43
>>>> 2009 @@ -2068,6 +2068,7 @@
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>>  sub inc {
>>>> +    local $_;
>>>>      my @includes = map { "-I$_" } @{ shift->includes };
>>>>      "@includes";
>>>>  }
>>>
>>> With the rest of the changes in this patch, is this particular change
>>> still necessary?
>>
>> Not really, but it's a safety measure. The "for ()" idiom is used in
>> many places. And I know these pieces of code that had bitten me now are
>> years old. Don't know why it happened now. So, I'd like to have it
>> there.
> 
> What about replacing the for () instances with 'for my'?  'local $_'
> may affect other parts of the code that haven't been looked at -
> that's my concern with that approach.

Well said, same concern here.

-- 
Philippe M. Chiasson     GPG: F9BFE0C2480E7680 1AE53631CB32A107 88C3A5A5
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/       m/gozer\@(apache|cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/


Mime
View raw message