Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Syntactic Confectionery Delight
 
PerlMonks  

Re^3: [RFC: Module proposal] Tracing sneaky EXPORTs using wrappers

by lodin (Hermit)
on Apr 12, 2008 at 01:09 UTC ( [id://679907]=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^2: [RFC: Module proposal] Tracing sneaky EXPORTs using wrappers
in thread [RFC: Module proposal] Tracing sneaky EXPORTs using wrappers

The name
If you plan to support only subroutines I don't think it should be called Devel::WrapExports. That name sound more generic and the way I interpret it is that the exporter mechanism will be wrapped to allow me to inspect everything that was exported. I don't know what a better name would be, but the uncommonly long Devel::WrapImportedSubs doesn't seem to bad after all. Imperfect as it may be the concept is clearly communicated. "Devel" - it's to help development; "wrap" - you do something upon each call; "imported" - only imported subroutines are of interest; "subs" - only subroutines are of interest. Note that I suggest "imported" over "exported" because you do it from a caller perspective. The package doing "use Devel::...;</c> later imports from the modules it uses. "Export" makes sense from the module author's perspective (like used as Exporter.pm), e.g. if a module Foo wanted to register every case of use Foo;.

The interface
I think that you have a good interface. However, I think you should open up to other ways of wrapping. Hook::LexWrap is convenient, but it can also break code that relies on caller(). It's possible (and simple) to do a completely transparent pre-hook, so another way to install the hook is quite important.

The implementation
Good luck. I think you'll need it. :-) It's quite a complicated task; there are several tricky cases. I'm looking forward to seeing how you solved it.

lodin

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: [RFC: Module proposal] Tracing sneaky EXPORTs using wrappers
by krazyk (Beadle) on Apr 16, 2008 at 05:36 UTC
    Your naming advice makes perfect sense to me. However, after more consideration of the implementation goals I had proposed, I'm now wondering if I should be a bit less ambitious and settle for something that will probably be just as useful anyway. I believe my original plan to deterministically identify the origin package for imported symbols would be more realistic if I drop the goal of supporting non-Exporter.pm exporters.

    You're right about the edge cases -- there are some tough ones. I believe that most of the ones I've thought of are within reach. For instance, one interesting problem is identifying which of all the use()d modules contributes symbol S to package P (or if S just came from P itself). I believe I could create a private, empty package in which a candidate module could be use()d, then check the resulting symbol table of the dummy package for symbols. The resulting set of symbols would represent those exported by the module's import().

    However, symbols not found this way might still have come from those modules (e.g. the package in question could require() a module M, then call M::import_deceptively(), which may do what import() conventionally does)! The probability of false negatives would be very low, but I can't think of a general way to positively conclude that a symbol has not been imported.

    I have a new appreciation for Exporter.pm, much maligned as it has been at times. As it is standard for Perl, placing dependence on it as a precondition for my module's efficacy seems reasonable.

    Here are the updated goals for Devel::WrapImportedSubs:
    • Wrap subs that use()d modules have exported via Exporter.pm (by looking for @EXPORT and @EXPORT_OK in their symbol tables)
    • Optionally wrap subs defined by the caller and fully-qualified subs called from other namespaces (since it would seem that users (like me) who need to do tracing would expect and need this easy-to-add feature)
    I'll think about alternatives to Hook::LexWrap.

    Thanks for help with advice on the design!
[reply]

In Section Meditations

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Domain Nodelet?

www.com | www.net | www.org
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://679907]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? • Last hour • Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others wandering the Monastery: (1)
As of 2024-04-25 03:30 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found