> >>>>> On Fri, 1 Sep 2000 15:46:46 -0700 (PDT), Doug MacEachern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
>
> > perhaps, i've cc'd andreas who originally chose -M, i have the feeling we
> > discussed the reasons ages ago. andreas, do you see any reason not to use
> > (stat _)[9] instead of -M _ ?
>
> I'm falling aslep while I write, so please forgive me if I say
> something stupid...
>
> You cannot change between -M _ and (stat _)[9] without inverting the
> comparison function too. If you watch a file's mtime within a perl
> program, -M _ will get smaller (and below zero) while (stat _)[9] will
> get bigger. So if you check for <= now, this would become >=
true.
> Otherwise I see no strong reason to use one or the other. I kind of
> like -M here because it's shorter to read/write and it's a smaller
> number and easier to compare visually. But, of course, it's risky if
> somebody plays with $^T, then they can break -M by action at a
> distance while they cannot break the stat thing.
Especially when the guide endorses playing with $^T, when one wants to get
a correct -M relative to the request start time and not the process start.
_____________________________________________________________________
Stas Bekman JAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker
http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide http://perl.apache.org/guide
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://apachetoday.com http://jazzvalley.com
http://singlesheaven.com http://perlmonth.com perl.org apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
