perl-docs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject PATCH porting.pod "First Mystery"
Date Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:36:35 GMT
Patch for "The First Mystery" section of the mod_perl porting guide as
per my conversation with Stas at YAPC::Europe::2003.

Takes out the suggestion of creating a Perl4-style library in the same
directory as a means to port CGI scripts.

Replaces it with something simpler and more reliable.

I've also changed "If you put your code into a library or module..."
to "If you put all your code into modules..." because if you put your
code into a Perl4-style library and then require it in more than one
registry script terrible things happen.  I don't think this is the
place to explain this so I think the guide should just say "modules"
and leave it at that.  

Probably the library problem should be explained elsewhere in the

Onece this is sorted out, a patch for perl_reference.pod will follow.

--- porting.pod.orig	Thu Aug 14 18:02:27 2003
+++ porting.pod	Fri Aug 15 13:37:33 2003
@@ -228,44 +228,42 @@
 It's important to understand that the I<inner subroutine> effect
 happens only with code that C<Apache::Registry> wraps with a
-declaration of the C<handler> subroutine. If you put your code into a
-library or module, which the main script require()'s or use()'s, this
-effect doesn't occur.
+declaration of the C<handler> subroutine.  If you put all your code
+into modules, which the main script use()s, this effect doesn't occur.
-For example if we move the code from the script into the subroutine
-I<run>, place the subroutines into the I<> file, save it in
-the same directory as the script itself and require() it, there will
-be no problem at all. (Don't forget the C<1;> at the end of the
-library or the require() might fail.)
+Do not use simple Perl4-style libraries located in the same directory
+as the script.  This technique was recommended by a previous version
+of this guide but is seriously flawed.  Subroutines in such libraries
+will only be available to the first script in any given interpreter
+thread to require() a library of any given name.  This can lead to
+strange sporadic failures.  It also won't work at all under mod_perl2
+because the current working directory is not the directory containing
+the script.
+The easiest and the fastest way to solve the nested subroutines
+problem is to change C<my> to C<local> C<our> for all variables for
+which you get the warning.  The C<handler> subroutines are never
+called re-entrantly and each resides in a package to itself.  Most of
+the usual disadvantates of package scoped variables are, therefore,
+not a concern.
-  ---------
-  my $counter;
-  sub run{
-    print "Content-type: text/plain\r\n\r\n";
-    $counter = 0;
-    for (1..5) {
-      increment_counter();
-    }
+  ----------
+  #!/usr/bin/perl -w
+  use strict;
+  print "Content-type: text/plain\r\n\r\n";
+  local our $counter = 0;
+  for (1..5) {
+    increment_counter();
   sub increment_counter{
     print "Counter is equal to $counter !\r\n";
-  1;
-  ----------
-  use strict;
-  require "./";
-  run();
-This solution provides the easiest and the fastest way to solve the
-nested subroutines problem, since all you have to do is to move the
-code into a separate file, by first wrapping the initial code into
-some function that you later will call from the script and keeping the
-lexically scoped variables that could cause the problem out of this
 But as a general rule of thumb, unless the script is very short, I
 tend to write all the code in external libraries, and to have only a

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

View raw message