[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       perl5-porters
Subject:    Re: [PATCH] Attribute::Handlers till ears are bleeding
From:       "Rafael Garcia-Suarez" <rgarciasuarez () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-11-30 7:50:47
Message-ID: b77c1dce0711292350p1ae40bd0x41393a33ab62a0d7 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 30/11/2007, Michael G Schwern <schwern@pobox.com> wrote:
> Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> >> Also the one safe backwards incompatible change, that of changing the handling
> >> of array refs to be consistent (test2), got lost.  I believe Damian was ok
> >> with that.  That would be restored by reverting 32488.
> >
> > Er, but if we revert this one the doc starts to lie. That's the one
> > that implements what Damian said in Message-ID:
> > <4745E9D9.1050102@conway.org>:
> > !> No. It's a bug. Something like:
> > !>
> > !>     :Loud(['till','ears','are','bleeding'])
> > !>
> > !> should pass a single (unnested) array ref with the four strings in it (since
> > !> that's what th argument looks like).
>
> Right, that's the part that never worked as documented and the documented way
> is lossy (ie. two inputs map to one output) so we decided to change it as long
> as it's already broken.
>
> Here's a doc patch to bring the docs in line with reality.  It also fixes the
> problem that the "my ears are bleeding" example was also wrong.

If I get everything correctly in this thread, I won't apply this,
since I left #32488 in, to comply with Damian's remark quoted above
(confirming it was a code bug and not a doc bug), and with this test
that now passes:

sub test2 :Loud(['till','ears','are','bleeding']) {

    [qw(till ears are bleeding)]
}
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]