Re^8: XML::Twig Support for Parameter Entities (@INC)

Loading a datastructure from a file not related to @INC once, 'do' and 'require' amount to the same. For a conditional 'do', I could check %INC instead of using 'require' and checking the return value, so you have a point here. For autoloading anonsubs as really private subs into a package, things are different, since 'require' checks @INC.

Yes, it is a bit sad that require doesn't return the same value from the first call at subsequent calls. For the above case, the AUTOLOAD block has to handle that via a private hash.

perl -le'print map{pack c,($-++?1:13)+ord}split//,ESEL'

Comment on Re^8: XML::Twig Support for Parameter Entities (@INC) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^9: XML::Twig Support for Parameter Entities (docs) by tye (Sage) on Aug 13, 2015 at 08:36 UTC
My testing shows that 'do' makes use of @INC. So it seems that I've found two problems with do's bit: except that it's more efficient and concise, keeps track of the current filename for error messages, searches the @INC directories, and updates %INC if the file is found. For me, 'do' does "search @INC" and does "update %INC", despite the docs. - tye	[reply]
Re^10: XML::Twig Support for Parameter Entities (right) by shmem (Chancellor) on Aug 13, 2015 at 08:59 UTC
For me, 'do' does "search @INC" and does "update %INC", despite the docs. No, not despite, exactly as the docs state: do searches @INC - I have gotten this bit wrong (you apparently too just now). So, the only remaining difference between require and do is that require doesn't load a file present in %INC, while do loads unconditionally. But since require doesn't cache the value it returns at the first call, I have to cache it anyways. Which means, that I'll be using do furthermore for all the cases I presented. Thanks! update: IMO perl should have an internal table holding the return values from require evals. perl -le'print map{pack c,($-++?1:13)+ord}split//,ESEL'	[reply]