On 15 Nov 2005, at 11:35, John Doe wrote:
Hope it's not a stupid question, but are you sure %d_cache
survives a
request? Maybe I'm totally misunderstanding something but I
thought after
the point
} end lexical scope
%d_cache gets destroyed (if not still referenced from somewhere
else).
I would have left out the scope-{} to keep %d_cache at file level.
Would that be wrong? And why?
The handler() sub stays in scope - it's basically a global variable,
and it holds a reference to %d_cache. So %d_cache goes out of scope,
but doesn't get destroyed. It hangs around until the next time
handler() is called, at which point you're back in the same scope and
can access %d_cache again.
I don't think this would work...
You can set up a global variable within your startup.pl (before apache
spawns child processed) and all children will get it, but if you
edit it in anyway the changes are only reflected in that specific child
process and you have no way of knowing if the user will hit the
same child process on their next page request.
or have I missed something ?
Leo
