[perl #46821] [TODO] [Pir] Recursive calls on ResizablePMCArrays fail. Is this what we want?

[Paul Cochrane]

# New Ticket Created by Paul Cochrane
# Please include the string: [perl #46821]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# <URL: http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=46821 >


In t/src/ro.t there is the todo item:

# XXX: should this work?

and the related pir code:

# three = 4 # should fail -- is that what we want

The question is: is the behaviour encapsulated in the test actually what we
want?

[Will Coleda via RT]

Post by Paul Cochrane
# XXX: should this work?
# three = 4 # should fail -- is that what we want
The question is: is the behaviour encapsulated in the test actually what we
want?

This test is in t/pmc/ro.t, not t/src/ro.t

The question can be summed up as: when marking a container PMC as readonly, should that
make all the PMCs that are contained readonly as well?

If so, we need to make that work (and add a test for at least a hash-style one as well), and if
not, we can reverse the sense of the todo test and enable it.

[Christoph Otto]

Post by Will Coleda via RT

Post by Paul Cochrane
# XXX: should this work?
# three = 4 # should fail -- is that what we want
The question is: is the behaviour encapsulated in the test actually what we
want?

This test is in t/pmc/ro.t, not t/src/ro.t
The question can be summed up as: when marking a container PMC as readonly, should that
make all the PMCs that are contained readonly as well?
If so, we need to make that work (and add a test for at least a hash-style one as well), and if
not, we can reverse the sense of the todo test and enable it.

I seem to remember a discussion where it was mentioned that marking a
container read-only should be shallow, but I couldn't find it in the irc logs.
Has a decision been made on this?

[Chromatic]

Post by Paul Cochrane
# XXX: should this work?
# three = 4 # should fail -- is that what we want
The question is: is the behaviour encapsulated in the test actually what we
want?

The real question is "Should setting the read-only property on a
ResizablePMCArray set the contained PMCs to read-only as well?"

I can fix the test (answer "no") or I can fix the code (answer "yes"). I just
can't tell you which behavior is most correct.

-- c

[Bob Rogers]

From: chromatic <***@wgz.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:45:54 -0800

The real question is "Should setting the read-only property on a
ResizablePMCArray set the contained PMCs to read-only as well?"

I can fix the test (answer "no") or I can fix the code (answer
"yes"). I just can't tell you which behavior is most correct.

-- c

If the answer were "yes", how would one create a read-only
ResizablePMCArray that contains mutable PMCs?

-- Bob Rogers
http://www.rgrjr.com/

[James Keenan via RT]

See also discussion in https://trac.parrot.org/parrot/ticket/658.