Re: mod_perl and my own package

According to what i know about mod_perl, what you want shouldn't matter. The first time yer script is hit, the script is compiled into byte code, including any modules associated with it. So there would be no need to have the module loaded by anything higher. Infact, that may be bad if you ran into issues with changing the library.

Also note that if you aren't going to use Exporter, then you should "use" require to import your modules, as that explicitly shows that you aren't going to do any hanky panky with the namespaces.

Comment on Re: mod_perl and my own package

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: mod_perl and my own package by perrin (Chancellor) on Oct 28, 2002 at 16:28 UTC
The advantage of loading it during startup is that the memory taken by that bytecode will be shared between processes.	[reply]
Re: Re: mod_perl and my own package by chromatic (Archbishop) on Oct 28, 2002 at 16:52 UTC
Also note that if you aren't going to use Exporter, then you should "use" require to import your modules, as that explicitly shows that you aren't going to do any hanky panky with the namespaces. What if you're using a module that exports nothing but runs class-specific initialization code in `import()`? Stick with the common idiom of importing an empty list of symbols.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^2: mod_perl and my own package by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Oct 29, 2002 at 20:19 UTC
if you aren't going to use Exporter, then you should "use" require to import your modules, as that explicitly shows that you aren't going to do any hanky panky with the namespaces. No, that's what `use Module ();` is for. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]