----- Original Message ----
> From: Michael G Schwern <schw...@pobox.com>
>
> >> %$Test = %$child;
> >>
> >> Watch out for edge cases of when subtest() dies, make sure the
> >> parent's guts
> >> get put back.
> >
> > "local" should be good for doing that right?
>
> Normally, yes. local $Test will localize the value of $Test, which is a
> reference, not its guts. local %$Test would seem to be the right thing, but
> I'm not sure if that will DWIM.
I've generally been extremely pleased with how robust 'local $hash->{value}'
is, but you can't localize lexical variables. I'd have to do something like:
my $test = Test::Builder->new;
local $test->{$_} = $child->{$_} for keys %$child;
(And you have to write it similar to that to avoid scoping issues).
I think that's safe, but would a clone be safer? We have file handles stored
in $test and I'm unsure of the behavior there or how to safely test that.
Cheers,
Ovid
--
Buy the book - http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/perlhks/
Tech blog - http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/
Twitter - http://twitter.com/OvidPerl
Official Perl 6 Wiki - http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl6
