Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2015
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 4:05 AM, demerphq <demerphq@gmail.com> wrote: > On 14 October 2015 at 00:42, Karl Williamson via RT > <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote: > > I may have closed this prematurely. I had not read the extensive > commentary on this when I closed it, only the original report. So I had > forgotten the controversy over what should happen. > > > > To recap what has happened in blead: It turns out that no one > (including me) thought about nextchr()'s behavior when the pattern is UTF-8 > encoded. It did a simple ++ of the parse position, which is the wrong > thing to do when the character is a multi-byte character. It would point > to the 2nd byte of that, hence the tests it did after the increment for > white space under /x would fail for white space that was multi-byte. When > I tried to write tests after fixing that, I discovered that nothing I came > up with would reliably fail. And valgrind showed that there reads outside > the buffer of garbage data. That led to me fixing a bunch of nextchr > calls, and that led to making all such stuff uniform. And that led to this > bug being fixed. > > > > But do we really want a (?#...) comment between a character and its > quantifier? > > IMO no. > > Yves > So the follow question would be: What should happen when someone does that?Thread Previous | Thread Next