Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from September 2016
On 13 September 2016 at 21:06, Todd Rinaldo via RT <perlbug-followup@perl.org> wrote: > On Tue Sep 13 12:01:23 2016, demerphq wrote: >> >> We can and should audit for similar patterns, but my gut feeling is >> that this code is pretty unusual, as it is trying to extract the >> function part of a fully qualified name. >> > > S_parse_gv_stash_name is making a similar look ahead mistake with name_cursor[1]. That looks messier to fix but it should probably be another case or a committer should just go through and make the corrections sans perlbug? A quick look didnt reveal to me any issues here. If you look at the way it uses name_em1 and name_end it looks fine. Can you point me more closely at the code you suspect? Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next