On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 12:45:57PM +0200, Thomas Lamprecht wrote:
> Am 06/06/2023 um 11:41 schrieb Dominik Csapak:
> >>> +my $untaint_recursive;
> >>
> >> I got flash backs w.r.t. refcount cycles here keeping all variables, and
> >> thus memory
> >> inside the body alive forever, don't we need a weaken?
> >>
> >> E.g., like we had to do in PVE::Status::Graphite's assemble.
> >
> > mhmm isn't that because there we use variables from outside the
> > function? here we only use the parameters themselves
>
> I'm not 100% sure about the details, but since then, seeing something like
> this pattern triggers my cycle instincts, I'd like to have that checked out
> closely.
I *do* prefer `my sub` these days.
However, for recursive subs you need to `use feature 'current_sub'` to
avoid ... well... leaks ;-)
So:
my sub untaint_recursive : prototype($) {
use feature 'current_sub';
my ($arg) = @_;
...
# For recursion:
__SUB__->($stuff);
...
}
Given that this function shouldn't be leaky, you could keep it, or even
pre-declare the sub to allow recursion:
my sub untaint_recursive : prototype($);
sub untaint_recursive : prototype($) {
<regular code>
}
however, `perlsub` explicitly states that this, too, can leak ;-)
_______________________________________________
pve-devel mailing list
pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel
