Re^5: DBM::Deep Problem

I think the point here is that without knowing Mr. Huckaby personally its difficult to asses his knowledge level. By the look of the module it would appear he is a competent fellow, but that section on Tie's suggests he might not be so well informed about some of perls esoterica. At the very least it would appear that he is discounting comments in MLDBM, something that is IMO unwise as the author, Gurusamy Sarathy, is a former pumpking (responsible for 5.6) which makes his opinion carry considerable weight.

---
$world=~s/war/peace/g

Comment on Re^5: DBM::Deep Problem

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^6: DBM::Deep Problem by merlyn (Sage) on May 18, 2005 at 12:24 UTC
Be careful not to mix apples and oranges here. MLDBM uses one strategy. DBM::Deep uses a different strategy that does indeed work to track changes to deep structures. However, there is a bug with autoviv: it doesn't call the `STORE` routine of the tied hash when a value is autovivied for a deeper reference. If you carefully extend your DBM::Deep hash, it works as advertised, and in a way that MLDBM cannot touch, and in a way that requires no binary DBM module. This is a remarkable achievement. The horsing around required by MLDBM referenced in Re^3: DBM::Deep Problem is not required in DBM::Deep.... you just have to not autovivify. The tie bug is sad. I wish it would get fixed. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.	[reply]
Re^7: DBM::Deep Problem by holli (Abbot) on May 18, 2005 at 12:34 UTC
The tie bug is sad. I wish it would get fixed. So write a patch :-) holli, /regexed monk/	[reply]
Re^8: DBM::Deep Problem by merlyn (Sage) on May 18, 2005 at 12:58 UTC
Well, I'll at least submit a Test::More that should eventually pass: Read more... (2 kB) -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^7: DBM::Deep Problem by demerphq (Chancellor) on May 18, 2005 at 12:39 UTC
Well, i guess i read the comments in MLDBM as including the problem of autovivification on ties. It says `This limitation exists because the perl TIEHASH interface currently ha +s no support for multidimensional ties.` [download] which i guess isnt exactly the same thing, but its pretty close. --- $world=~s/war/peace/g	[reply] [d/l]
Re^8: DBM::Deep Problem by merlyn (Sage) on May 18, 2005 at 13:05 UTC
Well, it doesn't need support for multidimensional ties. ties just need to get a bit smarter. See my test code, which I've submitted as a way for the P5P to understand what the breakage is. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker Be sure to read my standard disclaimer if this is a reply.	[reply]
Re^9: DBM::Deep Problem by demerphq (Chancellor) on May 18, 2005 at 13:39 UTC