Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from February 2017
Re: more process_optree
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Dave Mitchell
Date:
February 15, 2017 11:51
Subject:
Re: more process_optree
Message ID:
20170215115116.GV8158@iabyn.com
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 05:11:55PM -0700, Jim Cromie wrote:
> hi all,
>
> Id like to clarify & revise these patches, 2 new ones attached.
>
> it wasnt ready for prime-time, hence no RT submission.
> Now it passes make test, for 1 config.
> Im trying others now...
This is very annoying. You sent 2 patches to the list with a "stream of
conciousness" collection of random comments which are hard to understand
and waste everyone's time.
> > no-bisect: new call to finalize_optree is breaking an assertion in
> > Perl_op_free.
>
> this could be a convention, even though `git bisect` doesnt understand it.
> Id guess that Porting/*bisect* could be adjusted to deal with it, but ..
> I understand that such patches shouldnt get into origin/blead,
> and im not proposing to relax that rule now.
> But this might allow relaxing later.
I have no idea what exactly "this" refers to, Which makes the whole
paragraph incomprehensible.
> to clarify, whats actually new here is that finalize_optree is called
> where it wasnt previously.
>
> IOW, finalize_optree does not achieve full coverage of all OPs run.
> IMO this is a latent bug, present since the function was added.
> Specifically, S_fold_constants, gen_constant_list, and perhaps others,
> do not finalize their optrees.
No, these patches are completely wrong. S_fold_constants() is called on on
a *partial* subreee to possibly collapse that subtree into a single
constant. Later on when the *whole* optree has been parsed,
S_process_optree() does all the stuff associated with processing a
complete optree, like optimising it and attaching it to a CV.
Partial optrees like those in S_fold_constants() should *not* be passed
to S_process_optree().
--
The Enterprise successfully ferries an alien VIP from one place to another
without serious incident.
-- Things That Never Happen in "Star Trek" #7
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next