Re: Package namespace and Safe init cleanup for plperl [PATCH]

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 08:07:30PM -0700, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> A couple of comments. *note* I have not tested this as a whole yet
> (due to rejects).
>
> in plc_perboot.pl
> +$funcsrc .= qq[ package main; undef *{'$name'}; *{'$name'} = sub {
> $BEGIN $prolog $src } ];
>
> Any thoughts on using a package other than main? Maybe something like
> package PlPerl or what not? Not that I think it really matters...
> But it might be nicer to see in say NYTprof ?

The only interface Safe provides for sharing things with the compartment
shares them with the root package of the compartment which, from within
the compartment, is 'main::'.

It's an unfortunate limitation of Safe. I could have added more code to
wordaround that but opted to keep it simple for this commitfest.

> in plc_safe_ok.pl
> +use vars qw($PLContainer $SafeClass @EvalInSafe @ShareIntoSafe);
>
> Is there some reason not to use my here? The only reason I can think
> of is you want the *_init gucs to be able to stick things into
> @ShareIntoSafe and friends? And if so should we document that
> somewhere (or was that in an earlier patch that i missed?)?

It's a step towards providing an interface to give the DBA control over
what gets loaded into the Safe compartment and what gets shared with it.

I opted to not try to define a formal documented interface because I
felt it was likely to be a source of controversy and/or bikeshedding.
This late in the game I didn't want to take that chance.

I'd rather a few brave souls get some experience with it as-as, and collect
some good use-cases, before proposing a formal documented API.

> Also whats the use case for $SafeClass? Multiple versions of Safe.pm?
> Other modules that are like Safe.pm? Im just curious...

It's possible someone might want to use an alternative module.
Most likely their own local subclass of Safe that adds extra features.
I'd explored that when trying to integrate NYTProf. It seemed worth
at least making possible.

> Hrm I also dont see the point of the new "use Safe;" as we still eval
> it in in plperl_safe_init() care to enlighten a lost soul?

It just makes the file more self-contained for syntax checking:
perl -cw plc_safeboot.pl

> Other than those really quite minor questions that are arguably me
> nitpicking... It looks great to me.

Great, thanks Alex!

Tim.