I've been working on a Pod processor (likely to be called Pod::Tidy) and
I've run across what I at first thought might be a bug in Pod::Parser.
After re-reading perlpodspec I now suspect I've found a quirk in
Pod::Perldoc.
Consider the following example, Pod::Parser treats the lines with bar
and
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 09:14:16PM +0300, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
This just isn't cricket for non-GCC compilers (Solaris, AIX, and Tru64
claim a syntax error, IRIX seems to tolerate it). That a function
call (Perl_doing_taint in this case) gets expanded to func(a,b,) just
isn't going
Hi folks,
I've run into a nasty segfault that I suspect is related to deeply
recursive regular expressions. The odd thing is that just a deeply
recursive regex won't trigger this bug by itself, it must be run in
combination with another regex. Please see the test case below.
Cheers,
-J
--
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 08:43:23PM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
and to make the connection even more obvious you can refer to $type
in
the docs.
If the $type contains one of the substrings...
Or even better,
If I$type contains one of...
Or even best,
If C$type contains
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 09:40:11AM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:29:21AM -0500, Andy Lester wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 09:22:32AM -0700, Michael G Schwern ([EMAIL
PROTECTED]) wrote:
* Simplify the what's case-insensitive docs. Its just all non-Unix.
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 02:21:36PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 11:11:19AM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
Instead of trying to determine which filesystem your on (is there any
reasonable way of evening doing that?) why not just test for case
sensitivity when
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 05:23:11PM -0700, Michael G Schwern wrote:
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 01:49:38PM -1000, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
File::System::Spec::Win32 - uses Win32::FsType()
The 1st fall-back is the method I outlined of probing with tempdir() and
the 2nd fall-back (and last resort
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 06:25:29PM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
Yes, I agree probing is a good idea. I would assume that you would do
read-only probing, if possible. A sequence like
1. read the given directory.
2. choose an entry containing at least one character in [a-zA-Z].
3.
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 06:39:38PM -0700, Glenn Linderman wrote:
However, also note that the sensitivity characteristic of any particular
directory cannot be intuited from the sensitivity characteristic of any
other directory, due to softlinks pointing to other filesystems...
unless you
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Horsley Tom wrote:
... but it appears to me that fairly substantial patches are being
accepted without any sort of formal (or informal) copyright assignment.
Which is the way it should be. I gave up sending any patches in
on emacs years ago because it takes 5 minutes to create
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, Ken Williams wrote:
I'm about to release another beta of the PathTools distribution, with the
following copyright chunk in each .pm file:
=head1 COPYRIGHT
Copyright (c) 2004 by the Perl 5 Porters. All rights reserved.
This program is free software; you can redistribute it
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004, chromatic wrote:
On Mon, 2004-11-29 at 20:39 -0600, Ken Williams wrote:
I had the same question and I have no idea about the answer. I'm not
particularly interested in being the copyright owner, though. Maybe
the Perl Foundation? I've always wanted to make a more
Ok, lets drop this off list after this post.
That is a very good answer to my question. So now on to question #2: Why
isn't '1?:1' valid Perl?
Explicitly saying undef or 0 or whatever is not that much work and doesn't
leave people wondering if you really meant ?: or was it just that you
13 matches
Mail list logo
