You should consider cultural differences yourself. You are posting in forums moderated by people who are allowed to moderate how they choose. If you found a critical bug, that is an appropriate use of a github issue. Changing comments, being offensive, and asking questions that should go on a mailing list or in IRC (as was mentioned) is not. Being right means nothing if you can't communicate this in a way that your target audience will listen to.
On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 12:04 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > > So what do we have: > > While it is not proven > a) If it's not proven, we can agree that it doesn't prevent circular > references at all (for me it's obvious), before someone can proof that is > does, right? > b) You've fixed the misleading part of the documentation with my help, > because of a) right? > > > At least I've heard something that makes sense: you test your code with > the help of Devel::Cycle and want hide leaks outside an object. We are not > talking about is this good or bad, it just has a reason. If someone told me > that before closing a ticket (showing how smart he is), I would have saved > a lot of time and only would point that the documentation is incorrect. > > I also can show an example where and when to use IOC. I'm working on Mango > right now and found a big security issue: > > https://metacpan.org/pod/Mango#credentials > my $m = Mango::->new('mongodb://user:[email protected]'); > say Dumper $m; > > I was very surprised when I found that Mango keeps my password as is. (I > hope don't need to explain why). > So this is a good candidate for H::U::F (but we also have to prepare creds > before saving it) > > P.S.: > And about to being civil. Did you ever think maybe we have a kind of > cultural differences? > In my country the word doesn't matter, only an action matter. Words are > used as a way to communicate only and can't be offensive, but actions can > be. > > And if one person knows, that other one is mistaken, the first one should > push as hard as he can to prove it and help, and the other one will be > grateful in the future. Why? Because if you had a chance to help other > person and missed it (or did nothing) - you did a very bad thing. There is > a special boiler in the Hell for indifferent people. > But in the other hand there are cultures where almost every sentence > without "dear" or "friend" sounds like a personal offence. But we still can > communicate east cultures, right? Because computers work the same way for > everyone, no matter what is a color of your skin (with the exception for > redheads, for redheads comptures work 15% slower). > > And instead of "alexbyk, ur right, thank you, ur awesome" I got a ban for > "changing comments and being offensive". This is ridiculous. If I find some > critical bug in the future, how do I suppose to report it? Developers > should see things more widely and wisely > > > > So the question is, which one of equal variants is better and more >> simple? >> > > While it is not proven that using fieldhash actively prevents circular > references in the Mojo::IOLoop::Delay scenario, it does help avoiding false > positives with Devel::Cycle. > > perl -Ilib -Mojo -MDevel::Cycle -E 'my $ua = Mojo::UserAgent->new; > Mojo::IOLoop->delay(sub { my $d = shift; $ua->get("mojolicio.us" => > $d->begin); find_cycle $d }, sub { $ua->get("mojolicio.us" => > shift->begin) }, sub {})->wait' > > Without fieldhash you would see a circular reference here. > > Cycle (1): > $Mojo::IOLoop::Delay::A->{'remaining'} => \@B > $B->[0] => \&C > $C variable $ua => \$D > $$D => \%Mojo::UserAgent::E > $Mojo::UserAgent::E->{'connections'} => \%F > $F->{'c92d527d9db95e50179b96ba1d71d8dd'} => \%G > > $G->{'cb'} => \&H > $H variable $self => \$I > $$I => \%Mojo::IOLoop::Delay::A > > But a totally harmless one, because it gets automatically resolved once > the callback has been consumed. I'd rather not have these false positives > in Devel::Cycle output, and therefore consider the current solution > superior. > > -- > sebastian > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Mojolicious" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mojolicious. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Mojolicious" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mojolicious. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mojolicious" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mojolicious. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
