it's probably better to have a new 'sub cleanup_sub_pool', otherwise how do we know that it's not the main pool that gets destroyed twice?
+ # should destroy the subpool too, so + # cleanup is called twice $p->destroy;
also should we test that a sub-pool is destroyed before the main pool?
how about this
+1, but could also do:
sub cleanup {
my ($r, $what) = @{+shift};
$r->notes->add(cleanup => $what);
1;
}
...
$p->cleanup_register( \&cleanup, [$r, 'parent']);
$subp->cleanup_register(\&cleanup, [$r, 'child']);either way is good, just trying to put new features to stress ;)
also will this call destroy on $p on the exit from { } ?
{
my $p = APR::Pool->new;
}I think it should.
__________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH ------> Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide ---> http://perl.apache.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://use.perl.org http://apacheweek.com http://modperlbook.org http://apache.org http://ticketmaster.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
