Re: What does this code do?

[jwest]

I don't think this has anything to do with the position of the item in @EXPORT_OK or @fail.

What the author of the code seems to be interested in is if any of the members of the @_ list appear in @EXPORT_OK or @fail. If one cycles through every memeber of @_ one will appear as the first element. Likewise, if you like, you could check against $EXPORT_OK[-1] and $fail[-1] and get the same result.

Hope this helps!

--jwest

-><- -><- -><- -><- -><-
All things are Perfect
    To every last Flaw
    And bound in accord
         With Eris's Law
 - HBT; The Book of Advice, 1:7

[John M. Dlugosz]

Suppose @EXPORT_OK= qw/foo bar baz/; And the import list is (bar) alone. Just because the whole import list is scanned doesn't mean that if any element matches something in @EXPORT_OK then all elements in @EXPORT_OK are matched!

In this example, nothing in @_ matches $EXPORT_OK[0] or $EXPORT_OK[-1] for that matter. But something does match something in @EXPORT_OK.

So... I still don't get it.

[jwest]

You're absolutely right. I had, apparently mistakenly, assumed that @_ was a superset of the contents of both @EXPORT_OK and @fail, instead of a subset of either.

Lacking the context of how @_ is being defined, it was an easy assumption to make. Without visibility into the calling code, I'm reticent to hazard another guess.

I suppose it's not oustide the scope of reason that the code may not reflect the author's intent. In a module this pervasive, however, it's not likely that this is the case.

--jwest



-><- -><- -><- -><- -><-
All things are Perfect
    To every last Flaw
    And bound in accord
         With Eris's Law
 - HBT; The Book of Advice, 1:7

[John M. Dlugosz]

I think it says, "If an argument matches the first entry in @EXPORT_OK, then do the heavy (general) form. Even if said argument (and all arguments) contain no non-alpha characters (including sigels).

Likewise for the fail array, but I don't know what that's for yet.

Module buggy? Well, calling export_to_level was reportedly buggy a year ago, so who knows? If it mistakenly runs the general form, it will not malfunction, so a mistake in this logic could indeed go unnoticed.

I'm wondering if it's to support a feature that got dropped. Maybe the first entry in @EXPORT_OK was to mean something special?