On Sat, 8 Sep 2001, Doug MacEachern wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Stas Bekman wrote:
>
> > I was thinking that in 2.0 we could have two different <> configuration
> > containers, where <PerlConf> will replace the <Perl> from 1.x, and
> > introducing <Perl> to do something else.
>
> i'd rather see:
> <Perl main>
>
> or (this one that works already)
>
> <Perl>
> package main;
>
> then you can choose whatever package you want.
but as you said we have this already, and it doesn't take the problem
away. You have to remember to declare the package when you just want to
run some code and switch back to Apache::ReadConfig when you want to do
the configuration. To me it makes sense to let <Perl> run in the package
main, unless specified differently and have <PerlConf> or whatever which
explicitly declares the Apache::ReadConfig package for you. I'm just
trying to make things less error-prone for users.
_____________________________________________________________________
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://eXtropia.com/
http://singlesheaven.com http://perl.apache.org http://perlmonth.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
