Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from May 2011
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 07:32:15PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> p4raw-id: //depot/perl@19496
> + assert (fpc <= fops + maxops); /* ensure our buffer estimate was valid */
> arg = fpc - fops;
> { /* need to jump to the next word */
> int z;
The assertion triggers on the test case until this change:
commit f5c235e79ea25787354a22de0af257a672e955a0
Author: Dave Mitchell <davem@fdisolutions.com>
Date: Tue Dec 30 15:07:50 2003 +0000
Re: [perl #24774] eval + format - \n = pp_ctl.c assertion
heuristics for calculating buffer size needed to compile a format
didn't allow for \0
p4raw-id: //depot/perl@22005
diff --git a/pp_ctl.c b/pp_ctl.c
index ec79e24..48e3618 100644
--- a/pp_ctl.c
+++ b/pp_ctl.c
@@ -3580,7 +3580,7 @@ S_doparseform(pTHX_ SV *sv)
/* estimate the buffer size needed */
for (base = s; s <= send; s++) {
- if (*s == '\n' || *s == '@' || *s == '^')
+ if (*s == '\n' || *s == '\0' || *s == '@' || *s == '^')
maxops += 10;
}
s = base;
[tests snipped]
> I'm certainly not going to get a chance to look at this for at least 36 hours
> (and maybe not even then)
That statement already technically disproven because I did get enough to run
another bisect. But I think that that's it. I'm not in a position to figure
this out or fix it.
But something is telling me that the heuristics are, well, heuristics, and
at times wrong. Which in this case is a bad sort of wrong.
Nicholas Clark
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next