On Sat, 21 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2001 at 02:47:43PM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> > It would be nice if there was a
> >
> > use strict 'recursive';
> >
> > option that you could set in a script or module (package, whatever) which
> > would force all the modules it used to operate under strict.
>
> HUGE MASSIVE PROBLEM HERE! This might be useful if *all* the modules
> you use and *all* the modules which are then used are *all* under your
> control and that none of them are have elected to *not* use strict for
> some reason (like Exporter, which would be silly to use strict
> 'refs'). Otherwise, you're just causing unnecessary bugs.
Please note that I addressed this in my original post. This was
the specific reason that I suggested the "exclude" option.
> > Second topic:
> >
> > The debugger API PDD that I submitted a couple of days ago suggested that
> > we incorporate a profiler into the core. What do people think of this
> > idea?
>
> You mean like Devel::DProf, the profiler that's already in the core?
> ;) And is this new debugger API like the current debugger API, DB.pm?
> (Actually, I hope it isn't. Just making sure you're aware of what's
> already there.)
No, I do not mean something like Devel::DProf; that is a
module. I mean something that is in the core binary, the same way that
the perl debugger is in the core binary. Perhaps I should have made a
distinction between 'core' meaning "inside the perl binary" and 'core'
meaning "distributed in the default bundle which includes the perl binary
and a whole slew of Perl- and/or XS-based modules."
I agree that it should be possible to use any debugger and/or
profiler you choose. I am simply asking if we should provide a default
profiler, in the core binary, which will be invoked when no other
profiler is specified.
Dave
