Re: Problem of scope : $SIG{__WARN_

Um, why are you using signals? Why not wrap all of your DBI code in a big eval and then deal with $@ if $@ exists (setting the handle's RaiseError when you connect first).

Comment on Re: Problem of scope : $SIG{__WARN__} in a module...

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Problem of scope : $SIG{__WARN__} in a module... by wazoox (Prior) on Dec 07, 2004 at 10:55 UTC
That's a nice idea, but won't it somewhat slow down everything? I'll give it a try.	[reply]
Re^3: Problem of scope : $SIG{__WARN__} in a module... by chb (Deacon) on Dec 07, 2004 at 11:21 UTC
Depends on the eval :-) string eval -> slow, block eval -> as fast as any other perl snippet	[reply]
Re^3: Problem of scope : $SIG{__WARN__} in a module... by astroboy (Chaplain) on Dec 08, 2004 at 09:25 UTC
Using eval of a block is the recommendation in the DBI documentation: `The recommended way to implement robust transactions in Perl applications is to use RaiseError and eval { ... } (which is very fast, unlike eval "...").`	[reply] [d/l]