On 2/27/07, Joshua ben Jore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/27/07, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Owh goodness aragh *twitch*
>
> Together with the contortions required to safely examine $@ after
> an eval I'm getting tempted to put Unbreak::Eval on the CPAN.
Please do. Did Da
On 2/27/07, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Owh goodness aragh *twitch*
Together with the contortions required to safely examine $@ after
an eval I'm getting tempted to put Unbreak::Eval on the CPAN.
Please do. Did David Golden ever send his $@ examining snippet to you?
It did
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-27 06:25]:
>> $SIG{__DIE__} = sub {
>> # We don't want to muck with death in an eval, but $^S isn't
>> # totally reliable. 5.005_03 and 5.6.1 both do the wrong thing
>> # with it. Instead, we use caller. This also
* Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-27 06:25]:
> $SIG{__DIE__} = sub {
> # We don't want to muck with death in an eval, but $^S isn't
> # totally reliable. 5.005_03 and 5.6.1 both do the wrong thing
> # with it. Instead, we use caller. This also means it runs under
>
Fergal Daly wrote:
> sub isa {
> my ($obj, $class) = @_;
> # do correct isa stuff
> warn "my warning" if (exists $care_about{$class}) or (exists
> $care_about{ref $obj});
Consider what if $obj is a subclass of the class you care about? That
should probably get checked, too, as it too overrides
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 14:25, Fergal Daly wrote:
> Why not have something like
>
> ---
> package UNIVERSAL::isa;
> our %care_about;
>
> sub import {
> my $self = shift;
> @[EMAIL PROTECTED] = ();
> }
>
> sub isa {
> my ($obj, $class) = @_;
> # do correct isa stuff
> warn "my warning
On 27/02/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 13:58, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> What is wrong with the proof-of-concept I proposed?
The lines:
my $real_isa = \&UNIVERSAL::isa;
...
if( ref $obj and eval { $obj->$real_isa("Test::MockObjec
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 13:58, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> What is wrong with the proof-of-concept I proposed?
The lines:
my $real_isa = \&UNIVERSAL::isa;
...
if( ref $obj and eval { $obj->$real_isa("Test::MockObject") } ) {
-- c
Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> On 26/02/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Please reconsider autobox.
>>
>> I second this request.
>
> autobox in on CPAN and works. Moreover, the intent of the work on
> lexical pragmas was to enable people to write their own pragmas and
> put them on CPA
chromatic wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 February 2007 13:42, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
>> This handily solves your stated purpose of warning the user about
>> MockObjects not being used because of UNIVERSAL::isa mistakes WITHOUT
>> warning the user about EVERY mistaken use of UNIVERSAL::isa.
>
> $ perl
Eric Wilhelm wrote:
> There's nothing vigilante about writing code that assumes other code
> will behave properly. If I were going to put something on CPAN that
> messed with __DIE__ hooks, it would only be an audit module.
Oh good.
> I will, however,
> refuse to say "local $SIG{__DIE__}" in
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 13:42, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> This handily solves your stated purpose of warning the user about
> MockObjects not being used because of UNIVERSAL::isa mistakes WITHOUT
> warning the user about EVERY mistaken use of UNIVERSAL::isa.
$ perldoc perllexwarn
-- c
chromatic wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 February 2007 00:13, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>
>> If that were so it would only warn when a MockObject is looked at using
>> UNIVERSAL::isa/can() as a function.
>
> You really ought to read the code, especially the part where Test::MockObject
> and UNIVERSAL::i
On 26/02/07, chromatic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please reconsider autobox.
I second this request.
autobox in on CPAN and works. Moreover, the intent of the work on
lexical pragmas was to enable people to write their own pragmas and
put them on CPAN. (*) So just use it.
Or, maybe you were
# from Michael G Schwern
# on Monday 26 February 2007 09:20 pm:
>>breaking broken code is easier than
>> accounting for ignorance with the unfortunate side-effect that the
>> user learns something. The ignorance goes away and balance is
>> restored.
>
>Again, you're assuming the "user" here to be
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 00:13, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> If that were so it would only warn when a MockObject is looked at using
> UNIVERSAL::isa/can() as a function.
You really ought to read the code, especially the part where Test::MockObject
and UNIVERSAL::isa and UNIVERSAL::can are sep
chromatic wrote:
> On Monday 26 February 2007 21:20, Michael G Schwern wrote:
>> Case in point... my tests started suddenly warning about "UNIVERSAL::isa
>> called as a function in Class::DBI". After spending a bunch of time trying
>> to figure out what the hell was going on and if Redhat introduc
17 matches
Mail list logo
