Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2599Re: [soaplite] Possible bug in SOAP::Lite

Expand Messages
  • Duncan Cameron
    May 7, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      On 2003-05-07 Vishal Verma wrote:
      >--- Duncan Cameron <dcameron@...> wrote:
      >> A couple of points.
      >> A package might have been loaded due to it being
      >> within the same file as
      >> another package. For example;
      >>
      >> file A.pm
      >>
      >> package A;
      >>
      >> package A::SubPackageA;
      >>
      >> 1;
      >>
      >> Odd perhaps, but still valid. In this case you
      >> definitely don't want to
      >> do a 'require A::SubPackageA;'. So checking %INC
      >> isn't quite the right
      >> thing to do.
      >
      >I have a question. Does it hurt to do a "require
      >A::SubPackageA", if "A::SubPackageA" has already been
      >loaded? What side effects will that have?
      Well in this case the 'require' will fail because there is no such file
      as A/SubPackageA.pm. But in general you are right, there should be no
      problem in requiring a file that has already been loaded (if I read
      perlfunc correctly!).
      Given this, I am not too sure what SOAP::Lite is really checking for
      when it tests the existence of the symbol table for, in your example,
      module B.

      Regards,
      Duncan
    • Show all 4 messages in this topic