On Thu, 2003-06-19 at 19:31, Geoffrey Young wrote: > Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: > > Following the discussion on Apache::Reload and Apache::Symbol, I've > > taken out Apache::Symbol::undef from mp1, massaged it a bit and made it > > into ModPerl::Util::undef for mod_perl 2. > > is this really required anymore? > > Apache::Symbol::undef is there explicitly to keep our valid redefines from > throwing mandatory errors, but the mandatory error behavior was removed by > 5.6 - it's now covered separately through the warnings pragma and can be > turned off via $^W=0. > > see > > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=apache-modperl&m=96599355325073&w=2 > > I was only able to find a snippet of Doug's original comments wrt 2.0 - it > seems that none of the dev@ archives are complete that far back. but see > the very bottom of > > http://mathforum.org/epigone/modperl-dev/chalcrungwex/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > for his quoted thoughts.
Well, that's true expect for what Stas uncovered already. Constant
subroutines will generate a _mandatory_ warning when redefined, even
with no warnings and bleedperl ;-(
#> perl -le 'no warnings; $^W=0; use constant PI => 3.14; undef Π sub PI() { }'
Constant subroutine PI redefined at -e line 1.
So I guess we _still_ could make use of such functionnality
> HTH
>
> --Geoff
>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Philippe M. Chiasson /gozer\@(cpan|ectoplasm)\.org/ 88C3A5A5 (122FF51B/C634E37B)
http://gozer.ectoplasm.org/ F9BF E0C2 480E 7680 1AE5 3631 CB32 A107 88C3 A5A5
Q: It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.
perl -e'$$=\${gozer};{$_=unpack(P7,pack(L,$$));/^JAm_pH\n$/&&print||$$++&&redo}'
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
