Hi Tosh,
The function sigil ("&") is an archaic left over from before perl5. Calling a
function as "&cfg" is the same as saying "&cfg(@_)" and that implicit "@_" was
probably the source of your problem. A bit more information can be found here:
http://www.perlfoundation.org/perl5/index.cgi?subroutines_called_with_the_ampersand
Executive summary: don't use "&" on a sub unless you need a sub-ref:
my $x = \&cfg;
$x->();
On 2010-01-14, at 13:28 , Tosh Cooey wrote:
> Ok now I'm really boggled...
>
> If I use:
>
> my $vars = { config => &cfg() };
> instead of:
> my $vars = { config => &cfg };
>
> Then it works! So what's the difference between &cfg and &cfg() when it
> comes to mod_perl, or at least ModPerl::Registry?
>
> Thank-you all...
>
> Tosh
>
>
> Tosh Cooey wrote:
>> True, good point. I cleaned up my code and changed some things around and I
>> still have the same problem:
>> index.pl
>>
>> use MyConfig;
>> use ClientConf;
>> use MyUser;
>> my $vars = { config => &cfg };
>> MyConfig.pm
>> ###
>> package MyConfig;
>> use strict;
>> use Exporter;
>> use vars qw(@ISA @EXPORT);
>> @ISA = qw(Exporter);
>> @EXPORT = qw(&cfg &user);
>> my %CFG = { global vars... };
>> sub cfg {
>> return ClientConf->new();
>> }
>> sub user {
>> return MyUser->new();
>> }
>> 1;
>> The function "user" works just fine, it returns the object as expected.
>> BREAK
>> So, while I was testing to make sure everything works exactly as I described
>> above I discovered unexpected behaviour. &cfg is actually:
>> sub cfg {
>> my ($cfg_var) = @_;
>> if ($cfg_var) {
>>...do something...
>> } else {
>>return ClientConf->new();
>> }
>> }
>> &user is exactly as noted above. When I changed &user and added the same
>> $cfg_var and conditional it also did not return what I expected.
>> So basically the problem I'm having is that even though I'm calling &cfg
>> without arguments that $cfg_var is evaluating as "TRUE", but only under
>> ModPerl::Registry and not under regular unadulterated PERL.
>> As a PERL user for 15 years am I just the biggest newbie ever, or is there
>> something obscure going on that I should know about?
>> Thanks for anything!
>> Tosh
>> Ihnen, David wrote:
>>> Global? There's no need to use a global here. You only ever reference
>>> %CFG *in* the package... so just make it package scoped - it'll act like a
>>> static variable and persist. (scope it with 'my' and remove it from the
>>> export)
>>>
>>> You can always get the value you want with a call to MyConfig::cfg
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Tosh Cooey [mailto:t...@1200group.com] Sent: Thursday, January 14,
>>> 2010 10:45 AM
>>> To: modperl@perl.apache.org
>>> Subject: A ghost in the machine?
>>>
>>> Hi to everyone!
>>>
>>> I'm trying to find out if I'm passing objects properly under mod_perl
>>> because something is not working as I expect.
>>>
>>> index.pl
>>>
>>> use MyConfig;
>>> my $vars = { config => &cfg };
>>>
>>>
>>> MyConfig.pm
>>> ###
>>> package MyConfig;
>>>
>>> use strict;
>>> use Exporter;
>>> use vars qw(@ISA @EXPORT %CFG );
>>> use ClientConf;
>>> @ISA = qw(Exporter);
>>> @EXPORT = qw(%CFG &cfg);
>>>
>>> %CFG = { global vars... };
>>>
>>> sub cfg {
>>> my $CFG{$clientID} = new ClientConf;
>>> return $CFG{$clientID};
>>> }
>>> 1;
>>>
>>>
>>> Under normal PERL $vars->{config} is a MyConfig object. Under mod_perl
>>> nothing is returned. Debugging with "print" statements in &cfg shows me
>>> that "ref $CFG{$clientID}" is ClientConf, the object is there, but upon
>>> return it just disappears.
>>>
>>> I have other functions which "return new MyUser()" and these work
>>> perfectly, so I'm thinking that the problem lies with the global variable
>>> "$CFG" and that something which I think should be happening is NOT
>>> happening.
>>>
>>> I'm flummoxed...
>>>
>>> Thank-you for any insights!
>>>
>>> Tosh
>>>
>
> --
> McIntosh Cooey - Twelve Hundred Group LLC - http://www.1200group.com/
Eric Howe
e...@pieinsky.ca
