Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from December 2018
On 12/6/18 3:16 AM, Tony Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:28:54PM -0500, James E Keenan wrote:
>> Here is a case where the LGTM.com analysis of the Perl 5 source code
>> produces results that are at first plausible but ultimately incorrect.
>>
>> The following section of regexec.c is cited (https://lgtm.com/projects/g/Perl/perl5/alerts/?mode=tree&ruleFocus=2154840804)
>> with the warning-level alert "Comparison result is always the same":
>
> This was discussed in #133686, the comparison needs to stay to allow
> for local configuration of larger values of NUM_ANYOF_CODE_POINTS.
>
>> I then created a branch (jkeenan/lgtm-regexec-c; https://perl5.git.perl.org/perl.git/commitdiff/1a6c6e69bfa70bc55eb0d1e85538d7420659a652)
>> in which I simply removed those two comparisons. Notwithstanding the
>> alleged superfluousness of the two comparisons, I got these failures:
>>
>> #####
>> Test Summary Report
>> -------------------
>> re/regexp_noamp.t (Wstat: 0
>> Tests: 2006 Failed: 4)
>> Failed tests: 1830-1831, 1838-1839
>> re/regexp.t (Wstat: 0
>> Tests: 2006 Failed: 4)
>> Failed tests: 1830-1831, 1838-1839
>
> The tests are failing because of the added
> _CHECK_AND_OUTPUT_WIDE_LOCALE_CP_MSG(c);, from your commit:
>
> diff --git a/regexec.c b/regexec.c
> index eb24567e04..a265cc84cb 100644
> --- a/regexec.c
> +++ b/regexec.c
> @@ -9772,15 +9772,13 @@ S_reginclass(pTHX_ regexp * const prog, const regnode * const n, const U8* const
> match = TRUE;
> }
> else if (flags & ANYOF_LOCALE_FLAGS) {
> + _CHECK_AND_OUTPUT_WIDE_LOCALE_CP_MSG(c);
> if ((flags & ANYOFL_FOLD)
> - && c < 256
> && ANYOF_BITMAP_TEST(n, PL_fold_locale[c]))
> {
> match = TRUE;
>
>
> Remove that and they pass.
>
You are correct, as I now see in this newer branch:
jkeenan/2nd-lgtm-regexec-c.
I don't know how that line got into my original branch. Sorry for the
confusion.
Thank you very much.
Jim Keenan
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next