From @Hugmeir

perl -T -E 'delete $ENV{PATH}; package D { sub TIESCALAR { return bless {},
shift } sub FETCH { say ++$y; } } tie $x, "D"; system $x; say ""; exec $x'

Which calls FETCH 4 times, not 2. Also, I might be missing something/being
particularly thick today, but the output doesn't make sense to me​:
1
2

2
3

Shouldn't that be 1, 2, 3, 4, not 1, 2, 2, 3?

From @cpansprout

On Sat Nov 19 16​:47​:51 2011, Hugmeir wrote​:

perl -T -E 'delete $ENV{PATH}; package D { sub TIESCALAR { return
bless {},
shift } sub FETCH { say ++$y; } } tie $x, "D"; system $x; say ""; exec $x'

Which calls FETCH 4 times, not 2. Also, I might be missing something/being
particularly thick today, but the output doesn't make sense to me​:
1
2

2
3

Shouldn't that be 1, 2, 3, 4, not 1, 2, 2, 3?

That second part reminds me of #96332, but I don’t think it’s related.
system() seems to be clearing $y somehow, even without threads.

--

Father Chrysostomos

The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

From @cpansprout

On Sat Nov 19 22​:18​:02 2011, sprout wrote​:

On Sat Nov 19 16​:47​:51 2011, Hugmeir wrote​:

perl -T -E 'delete $ENV{PATH}; package D { sub TIESCALAR { return
bless {},
shift } sub FETCH { say ++$y; } } tie $x, "D"; system $x; say "";
exec $x'

Which calls FETCH 4 times, not 2. Also, I might be missing
something/being
particularly thick today, but the output doesn't make sense to me​:
1
2

2
3

Shouldn't that be 1, 2, 3, 4, not 1, 2, 2, 3?

That second part reminds me of #96332, but I don’t think it’s related.
system() seems to be clearing $y somehow, even without threads.

Er, I meant even without taint.

--

Father Chrysostomos

From @tonycoz

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 04​:47​:52PM -0800, Brian Fraser wrote​:

perl -T -E 'delete $ENV{PATH}; package D { sub TIESCALAR { return bless {},
shift } sub FETCH { say ++$y; } } tie $x, "D"; system $x; say ""; exec $x'

Which calls FETCH 4 times, not 2. Also, I might be missing something/being
particularly thick today, but the output doesn't make sense to me​:
1
2

2
3

Shouldn't that be 1, 2, 3, 4, not 1, 2, 2, 3?

The first "2" is inside a forked child, so the change isn't visible in
the parent.

Tony