29/11/2004 01:47:33, Michael G Schwern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 11:17:40PM +0000, Nigel Sandever wrote:
>> This is the same bug/limitation of threads::shared I reported in perlbug #
30702.
>>
>> Then, it was essentially dismissed as being "working as designed":
>
>If so then the design sucks.
>
I agree.
>
>I would like to know what it is that I'm doing "wrong" in Test::Builder.
>
I don't think that you are doing anything wrong. I have *never* seen share()
return a reference to a hash or an array that had contents. That is to say,
whenever you pass a reference to a hash or any array that hash something in it,
to share(), it *always* empties it.
perl -Mthreads -Mthreads::shared -wle"print %{ &share( {a=>1,b=>2}) },'?';"
?
Try any variation you like on that, it will always return a reference to an
empty hash or array. Scalars retain any pre-sharing value they might have.
This is 'by design'.
The only way to share a complex datastricture is to share a reference to an
empty one, and then copy the contents of your original into that. If any of the
values are hash or array references, then you maust likewise, share a reference
to an empty container of the appropriate type, and copy the contents of the
original into the shared container. Recurse till done.
>
>I doubt it is working as designed as sometimes the share() works and
>sometimes it doesn't. And I'm not even using any terribly complex data
>structures.
>
>
>--
>Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pobox.com/~schwern/
>HA HA HA You're all so rediculous! But thanks for the money!
>
>
njs.
