Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • So it can serialize closures without losing information?
    • Yep. Eg:

      D:\Development>perl -MDDS -e"my $closure=do{ my $x=100; sub { $x++ } }; Dump $closure"

      my ($x);
      $x = 100;
      $CODE1 = sub {
                            $x++;
                        };
      • The following code crashes.

        #! /usr/bin/perl
        use strict;
        use Data::Dump::Streamer;

        Dump [
          map {
            my $x;
            my $x_eclipse_1;
            sub {$x}, sub {$x_eclipse_1};
          } 1, 2
        ];

        I thought about trying to solve this with intelligent mangling, but there is always a boundary case. For instance if you mangle anything with $x_eclipse_1 in some way (eg make it $x__eclipse_1), what if there is a global variable $x_eclipse_1? Now you've changed semantics or else get a crash.

        After

        • The following code crashes.

          Shoot. Yep. It does. And it highlights what I forgot to document: the subs being dumped shouldn't mix the use of dynamics and lexicals with the same name, and that its is unwise to use variables matching /_eclipse_\d+$/. (Which personally I think is not such a terrible restriction, albeit not at all ideal.)

          Dealing with the former is actually very tricky, and probably wont ever be solved properly. A good example is

          my $a=sub { $a++ };

          The second issue regarding eclipsed variables is probably easier to solve. For instance I could verify that none of the dumped bound lexicals have a matching name. One approach would be resolving the nesting properly via scoped blocks but there will always be pathological case that can't be reconstructed that way. At that point I'd have to start dealing with aliasing, and frankly I didnt think it was worth it prefering to rename the vars in the subs being dumped.

          Unfortunately its not possible to use the strategy you suggested of using an array of "versions" of the var. I actually considered something very similar but it didnt prove to be too promising because of the way Deparse uses names and the options available to me to convince it to use names other than the ones it should. The variable name change logic doesn't involve pattern matching, its done at a lower level by fooling deparse into thinking that the variable names of the vars bound to the sub are different to what they actually are.

          Anyway, thanks for the heads up, Ill look into making the eclipsed var name logic smarter to prevent collisions, and ill also add some docs.