On Jan 7, 2015, at 11:30 AM, Karl Williamson <pub...@khwilliamson.com> wrote:
>> I asked David about the inconsistency and he asked that I bring it up here.
>>
>> Shouldn't the more strict regexp be used in both places?
>
> I think so. Looking at the regexes though, I didn't know that directives
> could be capitals, and I thought that digits had to always be the last
> character (or characters ?) in a directive. It seems to me that both regexes
> should be tightened.
perlpodspec says:
> Pod content is contained in Pod blocks. A Pod block starts with a line
> that matches <m/\A=[a-zA-Z]/>, and continues up to the next line that
> matches "m/\A=cut/" or up to the end of the file if there is no
> "m/\A=cut/" line.
I agree that’s too liberal. I suggest
/\A=([a-zA-Z]+\d*)\b/
>> On the first pass the parser marks the line as pod (presumably matching
>> a directive)
>> but on the second pass the line doesn't match any patterns and it all
>> falls through as a paragraph.
>>
>> This inconsistency allows binary data to be treated as a pod document.
>> Is there a recommended way to parse the pod out of a document that might
>> have binary data in it?
>
> I don't know about this.
It seems to me that if the second match does not think it is Pod, then it
should not be a paragraph (unless it was already in a pod section from a
previous declaration). I suspect that if we tighten up the first regex as I
suggest year, and sync the second with it, we should be okay. Thoughts?
Best,
David
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
