Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2003
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 06:58:09PM +0000, Nicholas Clark wrote: > On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 11:12:15AM +0000, Dave Mitchell wrote: > > Note that %_ should *not* be used to print SVs containing the names > > of pad lexicals, since for these the SvCUR() field is hijacked for the > > generation number. Sticking with %s and PVX(sv) is the Right Thing to do > > here. (See PAD_COMPNAME_GEN()). > > Is all this code exclusively in pad.c now? ie does the above reversion > remove any wrong use of %_ ? I'm not sure I understand the question - did you mean 'any' in the sense of 'all'? if so, then yes, all the stuff related to the generation hack for lexical names is in pad.c, so I presume that your reversion is sufficient. -- You never really learn to swear until you learn to drive.