Change 29856 by [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2007/01/17 19:49:29
Integrate:
[ 26981]
The flags manipulation in sv_setsv_flags can be more efficient.
[ 26982]
Merge the IOK and NOK clauses together in sv_setsv_flags.
[ 26987]
Squeeze more flag manipulations together in sv_setsv_flags.
[ 26997]
Assert that IVs and NVs can never be tainted.
[ 27043]
Correct my comment, so that it's actually useful. :-)
[ 27107]
Remove a duplicate flag copy line from Perl_sv_setsv_flags.
[ 27110]
I think that "merge Perl_sv_2[inpu]v" and "reduce duplication in
sv_setsv_flags" are about as done as they can be.
[ 29855]
Replace SvRELEASE_IVX(dstr) with SvOOK_off(dstr) in sv_setsv_flags(),
because it's not possible for dstr to be COW at this point, due to an
earlier force_normal.
Affected files ...
... //depot/maint-5.8/perl/pod/perltodo.pod#26 integrate
... //depot/maint-5.8/perl/sv.c#284 edit
Differences ...
==== //depot/maint-5.8/perl/pod/perltodo.pod#26 (text) ====
Index: perl/pod/perltodo.pod
--- perl/pod/perltodo.pod#25~29846~ 2007-01-17 03:36:40.000000000 -0800
+++ perl/pod/perltodo.pod 2007-01-17 11:49:29.000000000 -0800
@@ -373,18 +373,6 @@
might want to determine what ops I<really> are the most commonly used. And in
turn suggest evictions and promotions to achieve a better F<pp_hot.c>.
-=head2 reduce duplication in sv_setsv_flags
-
-C<Perl_sv_setsv_flags> has a comment
-C</* There's a lot of redundancy below but we're going for speed here */>
-
-Whilst this was true 10 years ago, the growing disparity between RAM and CPU
-speeds mean that the trade offs have changed. In addition, the duplicate code
-adds to the maintenance burden. It would be good to see how much of the
-redundancy can be pruned, particular in the less common paths. (Profiling
-tools at the ready...). For example, why does the test for
-"Can't redefine active sort subroutine" need to occur in two places?
-
@@ -405,16 +393,6 @@
approach would find savings in C<GV>s and C<CV>s, if not all the other
larger-than-C<PVMG> types.
-=head2 merge Perl_sv_2[inpu]v
-
-There's a lot of code shared between C<Perl_sv_2iv_flags>,
-C<Perl_sv_2uv_flags>, C<Perl_sv_2nv>, and C<Perl_sv_2pv_flags>. It would be
-interesting to see if some of it can be merged into common shared static
-functions. In particular, C<Perl_sv_2uv_flags> started out as a cut&paste
-from C<Perl_sv_2iv_flags> around 5.005_50 time, and it may be possible to
-replace both with a single function that returns a value or union which is
-split out by the macros in F<sv.h>
-
=head2 Implicit Latin 1 => Unicode translation
Conversions from byte strings to UTF-8 currently map high bit characters
==== //depot/maint-5.8/perl/sv.c#284 (text) ====
Index: perl/sv.c
--- perl/sv.c#283~29851~ 2007-01-17 07:41:23.000000000 -0800
+++ perl/sv.c 2007-01-17 11:49:29.000000000 -0800
@@ -3090,8 +3090,10 @@
SvIV_set(dstr, SvIVX(sstr));
if (SvIsUV(sstr))
SvIsUV_on(dstr);
- if (SvTAINTED(sstr))
- SvTAINT(dstr);
+ /* SvTAINTED can only be true if the SV has taint magic, which in
+ turn means that the SV type is PVMG (or greater). This is the
+ case statement for SVt_IV, so this cannot be true (whatever gcov
+ may say). */
return;
}
goto undef_sstr;
@@ -3111,8 +3113,10 @@
}
SvNV_set(dstr, SvNVX(sstr));
(void)SvNOK_only(dstr);
- if (SvTAINTED(sstr))
- SvTAINT(dstr);
+ /* SvTAINTED can only be true if the SV has taint magic, which in
+ turn means that the SV type is PVMG (or greater). This is the
+ case statement for SVt_NV, so this cannot be true (whatever gcov
+ may say). */
return;
}
goto undef_sstr;
@@ -3203,25 +3207,18 @@
}
(void)SvOK_off(dstr);
SvRV_set(dstr, SvREFCNT_inc(SvRV(sstr)));
- SvROK_on(dstr);
+ SvFLAGS(dstr) |= sflags & (SVf_IOK|SVp_IOK|SVf_NOK|SVp_NOK|SVf_ROK
+ |SVf_AMAGIC);
if (sflags & SVp_NOK) {
- SvNOKp_on(dstr);
- /* Only set the public OK flag if the source has public OK. */
- if (sflags & SVf_NOK)
- SvFLAGS(dstr) |= SVf_NOK;
SvNV_set(dstr, SvNVX(sstr));
}
if (sflags & SVp_IOK) {
- (void)SvIOKp_on(dstr);
- if (sflags & SVf_IOK)
- SvFLAGS(dstr) |= SVf_IOK;
+ /* Must do this otherwise some other overloaded use of 0x80000000
+ gets confused. Probably SVprv_WEAKREF */
if (sflags & SVf_IVisUV)
SvIsUV_on(dstr);
SvIV_set(dstr, SvIVX(sstr));
}
- if (SvAMAGIC(sstr)) {
- SvAMAGIC_on(dstr);
- }
}
else if (sflags & SVp_POK) {
@@ -3263,22 +3260,18 @@
*SvEND(dstr) = '\0';
(void)SvPOK_only(dstr);
}
- if (sflags & SVf_UTF8)
- SvUTF8_on(dstr);
if (sflags & SVp_NOK) {
- SvNOKp_on(dstr);
- if (sflags & SVf_NOK)
- SvFLAGS(dstr) |= SVf_NOK;
SvNV_set(dstr, SvNVX(sstr));
}
if (sflags & SVp_IOK) {
- (void)SvIOKp_on(dstr);
- if (sflags & SVf_IOK)
- SvFLAGS(dstr) |= SVf_IOK;
+ SvOOK_off(dstr);
+ SvIV_set(dstr, SvIVX(sstr));
+ /* Must do this otherwise some other overloaded use of 0x80000000
+ gets confused. I guess SVpbm_VALID */
if (sflags & SVf_IVisUV)
SvIsUV_on(dstr);
- SvIV_set(dstr, SvIVX(sstr));
}
+ SvFLAGS(dstr) |= sflags & (SVf_IOK|SVp_IOK|SVf_NOK|SVp_NOK|SVf_UTF8);
if ( SvVOK(sstr) ) {
const MAGIC * const smg = mg_find(sstr,PERL_MAGIC_vstring);
sv_magic(dstr, NULL, PERL_MAGIC_vstring,
@@ -3286,34 +3279,17 @@
SvRMAGICAL_on(dstr);
}
}
- else if (sflags & SVp_IOK) {
- if (sflags & SVf_IOK)
- (void)SvIOK_only(dstr);
- else {
- (void)SvOK_off(dstr);
- (void)SvIOKp_on(dstr);
+ else if (sflags & (SVp_IOK|SVp_NOK)) {
+ (void)SvOK_off(dstr);
+ SvFLAGS(dstr) |= sflags & (SVf_IOK|SVp_IOK|SVf_IVisUV|SVf_NOK|SVp_NOK);
+ if (sflags & SVp_IOK) {
+ /* XXXX Do we want to set IsUV for IV(ROK)? Be extra safe... */
+ SvIV_set(dstr, SvIVX(sstr));
}
- /* XXXX Do we want to set IsUV for IV(ROK)? Be extra safe... */
- if (sflags & SVf_IVisUV)
- SvIsUV_on(dstr);
- SvIV_set(dstr, SvIVX(sstr));
if (sflags & SVp_NOK) {
- if (sflags & SVf_NOK)
- (void)SvNOK_on(dstr);
- else
- (void)SvNOKp_on(dstr);
SvNV_set(dstr, SvNVX(sstr));
}
}
- else if (sflags & SVp_NOK) {
- if (sflags & SVf_NOK)
- (void)SvNOK_only(dstr);
- else {
- (void)SvOK_off(dstr);
- SvNOKp_on(dstr);
- }
- SvNV_set(dstr, SvNVX(sstr));
- }
else {
if (dtype == SVt_PVGV) {
if (ckWARN(WARN_MISC))
End of Patch.
