develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from January 2013

Re: [perl #116366] [PATCH] better POD for unpackstring

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Dave Mitchell
January 14, 2013 13:04
Re: [perl #116366] [PATCH] better POD for unpackstring
Message ID:
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 06:08:49PM -0800, bulk88 wrote:
> diff --git a/pp_pack.c b/pp_pack.c
> index 50d4a63..cc1e637 100644
> --- a/pp_pack.c
> +++ b/pp_pack.c
> @@ -1190,8 +1190,10 @@ first_symbol(const char *pat, const char *patend) {
>  =for apidoc unpackstring
>  The engine implementing unpack() Perl function. C<unpackstring> puts the
> -extracted list items on the stack and returns the number of elements.
> +extracted list items on the @_ stack and returns the number of elements.
>  Issue C<PUTBACK> before and C<SPAGAIN> after the call to this function.
> +Unlike L</call_pv>, do not do a C<PUSHMARK>. This function takes no parameters
> +on the @_ stack.

I'm not very keen on this change. I've never heard the perl stack referred
to as the '@_ stack' before. I'd suggest just calling it 'the perl stack'
(yes, perl has several stacks, but the PL_stack_sp stack is the only one
you would normally expect to push values onto). Or perhaps 'the argument
stack', which is what xstut.pod does.

The PUSHMARK thing I find totally confusing.  I guess you're trying to say
that the function won't pop a mark?? In which case maybe something like:

    The function does not take any values from the argument stack, nor
    does it pop any marks.

Music lesson: a symbiotic relationship whereby a pupil's embellishments
concerning the amount of practice performed since the last lesson are
rewarded with embellishments from the teacher concerning the pupil's
progress over the corresponding period.

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About