[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Geoffrey Young wrote: > > >>that you are required to use() the classes that provide the methods you >>require in your handler is by design. you can search the dev@ archives for >>lots of discussions on this particular issue. see also >>ModPerl::MethodLookup and some notes in an article I wrote some time ago >>(the first of a brief series on mp2): >> >> http://www.perl.com/pub/a/2003/04/17/filters.html > > > Thanks for the information. If I understand correctly then it is thus a > bug in CGI.pm (it uses $r->headers_in without doing use APR::Table).
that would be a bug, then. > > Maybe it would be possible to include this in the documentation, as it is > not clear at this moment. E.g. on > http://perl.apache.org/docs/2.0/api/Apache/RequestRec.html it is not shown > in the synopsis (the code in the synopsis will generate the error as > well). well, the only error I get from the code there is on canonical_filename(), which no longer exists. that has been fixed :) other than that, the code in the synopsis works just fine for me. remember, $r->headers_in is a request_rec slot, so loading Apache::RequestRec is sufficient to call headers_in() - the object returned by headers_in() is an APR::Table object. so, to be able to manipulate headers_in you need to use both methods, but to merely call the slot accessor you only need RequestRec.pm. yeah, I know... but, again, a glance at the dev archives would fine where this was all hashed out to death, so it doesn't make much point to argue things again here unless folks find the relevant threads and take the time to implement some of the design suggestions made there. --Geoff -- Report problems: http://perl.apache.org/bugs/ Mail list info: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/modperl.html List etiquette: http://perl.apache.org/maillist/email-etiquette.html
