Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2013
On 01/18/2013 04:56 AM, Dave Mitchell wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 06:28:15PM -0500, bulk88 wrote: >> davem, do you have an opinion on khw's >>> What would the implications be of changing the macro to match the prior >>> documentation, and return true if it is indeed SvIOK with a positive >>> number? >> >> which I understand to mean adding lt/gt check against the UV/IV in >> SvUOK macro? > > I don't like this idea. I'm happy with your suggested doc change, which > documents the status quo: > >> Returns a boolean indicating whether the SV contains an integer which >> must be interpreted as unsigned. An integer whose value is within the >> range of both an IV and an UV maybe be flagged as either. > Now changed with commit a6ceea0637411cc48e4e043c7d222d707dd3611a I changed Darin's wording slightly so as to not imply that a negative number could be SvUOK.Thread Previous | Thread Next