Re^6: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND)

in reply to Re^5: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND)
in thread is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run?

> and the destructor of that would again run later.

? That is how it works!

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :)

Je suis Charlie!}

Comment on Re^6: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND) by morgon (Priest) on Feb 03, 2017 at 15:50 UTC
But it only works because you know up-front that it's the destructor of a particular class that you need to handle. A true SUPEREND-feature should work without such knowledge and that is I believe not possible.	[reply]
Re^8: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND) by LanX (Saint) on Feb 03, 2017 at 15:55 UTC
> A true SUPEREND-feature should work without such knowledge and that is I believe not possible. It is, you can introspect all available packages (look into `%main::` ) so far in a loop, check if DESTROY exists and install a wrapper. Do you need it? Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language and ☆☆☆☆ :) Je suis Charlie!}	[reply] [d/l]
Re^9: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND) by morgon (Priest) on Feb 03, 2017 at 16:01 UTC
Hm, interesting idea. But I suppose the code in SUPEREND could dynamically create a new class with a destructor. At that time you've already done your introspection, so this destructor would not have been covered I suppose... And no, I don't really need it, I would only be interested if it was possible at all in the most general case...	[reply]
Re^10: is there a way to ensure some code is the last thing that is run? (SUPEREND) by LanX (Saint) on Feb 03, 2017 at 16:09 UTC

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom