Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from October 2015
On 15 October 2015 at 02:29, Eric Brine <ikegami@adaelis.com> wrote: > 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? Throw an error, modifier illegal on zero width match. Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next