Re^3: 'base' versus @ISA, why?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: 'base' versus @ISA, why? by bart (Canon) on Jul 23, 2007 at 19:29 UTC
It's checking `${"$package\::VERSION"}` or something to that effect, while a package is not required to have a `$VERSION` variable. Maybe its behavior has been sanitized, but the damage is done. My trust has been shaken.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^5: 'base' versus @ISA, why? by perrin (Chancellor) on Jul 23, 2007 at 20:30 UTC
Hmm, none of my classes have $VERSION declarations, and base has never given me any trouble about it.	[reply]
Re^6: 'base' versus @ISA, why? by adrianh (Chancellor) on Jul 24, 2007 at 11:53 UTC
Hmm, none of my classes have $VERSION declarations, and base has never given me any trouble about it. Me neither. The current (5.8.8) use base requires the file (and ignores any not-found exceptions) if there isn't already a $VERSION for the package containing a scalar. So I guess if you have something that sets $VERSION in another package you will get problems - but that seems am odd edge case to me.	[reply]