in reply to Re: inlined DEBUG constant versus $DEBUG
in thread inlined DEBUG constant versus $DEBUG
With sub DEBUG() { 0 } I still step thru the statement that contains the print. When debugging one goes from one nextstate opcode to the next. We see that consecutive nextstate statements are not fusionned as I expected them to be:
Both oneliners give me the same tree: perl -e ' sub DEBUG() { 0 } ; use O qw( Concise -exec); print "toto" if DEBUG; print "toto" if DEBUG'
perl -e ' use constant DEBUG =>0; use O qw( Concise -exec); print "tot +o" if DEBUG; print "toto" if DEBUG' 1 <0> enter 2 <;> nextstate(main 1 -e:1) v 3 <;> nextstate(main 1 -e:1) v 4 <@> leave[t1] vKP/REFC
I don't understand how I get thru one line of constant.pm when debugging using constants!!!
I tested using perl 5.6.1
-- stefp
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re: Re: Re: inlined DEBUG constant versus $DEBUG
by derby (Abbot) on Sep 19, 2001 at 19:14 UTC |