Recently I thought that strings "\xA0" and "\x{A0}" will be interpreted
differently, namely last one will be interpreted as Unicode (U+00A0)
Quick check with
perl -MDevel::Peek -we "print Dump qq/\xa0/,Dump qq/\x{a0}/"
shows that "\xA0" and "\x{A0}" both interpreted as not-Unicode.
However, th
Changes to vmsish.h and vms.c:
1. Add new routine to translate VMS error status codes into UNIX errno
values.
2. Fix routines that callers expect not to modify the input strings to
actually not modify them.
3. Put the const qualifiers on all input pointers that are not modified
so that the
John E. Malmberg wrote:
Sorry, my buggy rsync did not bring over the .patches file.
t/run/exit FAILED
Now fixed:
Fixes to the mapping of VMS (NATIVE) status codes to PERL (UNIX) in
progress. Changes needed to vms.c,perl.h,pp_sys.c and t/run/exit.t so far.
# New Ticket Created by [EMAIL PROTECTED]
# Please include the string: [perl #36848]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36848 >
This is a bug report for perl from [EMAIL PROTECTED],
generated with the help of p
On 26-Jul-2005 Andy Dougherty via RT wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Niki Waibel wrote:
>
>> On 25-Jul-2005 Andy Dougherty via RT wrote:
>> > On Thu, 10 Jun 2005, Niki W. Waibel wrote:
>> >
>> >> # New Ticket Created by "Niki W. Waibel"
>> >> # Please include the string: [perl #36235]
>> >> # i
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 11:45:16PM +0200, Rafael Garcia-Suarez wrote:
> On 8/9/05, Alexey Tourbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Okay. My concern is that bugfix changes are not tagged as "bufixes" (at
> > least as they come through perl5-changes), so there's a chance you can
> > miss the one when
On 8/9/05, Alexey Tourbin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay. My concern is that bugfix changes are not tagged as "bufixes" (at
> least as they come through perl5-changes), so there's a chance you can
> miss the one when there's a lot of them.
I should get more verbose in my application logs...
>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dominic Dunlop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> stringified as "-0". (If somebody can point me at a user-visible way
> in Perl of extracting the sign from an NV other than by stringifying
> it, I'd love to hear about it.) And of course everything's skipped
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 16:04:00 +0400 , "Konovalov, Vadim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> As a honest user that does RTFM, I got an impression exactly opposite: I use
> \x{} even for two-byte to get Unicode which is internally in UTF-8, and
> I use \xXX otherwise.
>
> Now I see I was wrong and in o
Hello,
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 15:09:42 +0530, Sastry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Hi
>
> As suggested by you, I ran the following script which resulted in
> substituting all the characters with X irrespective of the "special
> case" [i-j].
>
> ($a = "\x89\x8a\x8b\x8c\x8d\x8f\x90\x91") =~ s/[\x89-\x91
Hi Nicholas Clark
I agree that it is supposed to print the numerical equivalent 97.
I attempted to see if there is any bug in the encode module.
Surprisingly, I noticed that there are two .c files in
ext/Encode/def_t.c and ext/Encode/Byte/byte_t.c which are generated
using enc2xs. They are diff
>Leaving aside alternate backends (-MO=...) and the possibility of perl
>lying over and dying during the compile, there\'s still perl -c.
-c is "check syntax" and not "compile".
And there are also -h and -v, but I wouldn't take serious writing something
like "perl can be used for checking syntax
> > One need to use correct re-encoding functions or write
> "\x{A0}" instead of
> > \xA0
>
> That shouldn't make any difference:
>
> $ ./perl -Ilib -MDevel::Peek -e 'Dump "\xA0"'
> SV = PV(0x985de28) at 0x985cce0
> REFCNT = 1
> FLAGS = (PADTMP,POK,READONLY,pPOK)
> PV = 0x9864f80 "\240"\0
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 03:34:17 -0700, Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 12:41:34PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> > I have the idea that the Encode part should be Cc's to Dan K, but this
> > file is not mentioned in Maintainers.pl
>
> 'Encode' =>
>
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 06:21:48 -0500, Steve Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Attached is a patch for a couple of random warnings I've looked at but
> haven't gotten to fixing. The fix in nostdio.h is complained about
> by gcc if compiling with -Wundef. The change in perl.c is complained about
>
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 01:38:11PM +0200, Piotr Fusik wrote:
> >+A program that compiles and usually executes L scripts. Or is
> >+that L?
>
> s/is that/are they/, I guess, but I may be wrong...
Implied "is that phrase in the previous sentence supposed to be".
"Or are they" would be correct also
Automated smoke report for 5.9.3 patch 25278
fixit.xs4all.nl: Pentium II (i386/1 cpu)
onbsd/os - 4.1
using cc version egcs-2.91.66 19990314 (egcs-1.1.2 release)
smoketime 3 hours 55 minutes (average 1 hour 57 minutes)
Summary: FAIL(F)
O = OK F = Failure(s), extended repor
>+A program that compiles and usually executes L scripts. Or is
>+that L?
s/is that/are they/, I guess, but I may be wrong...
s/usually //
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 03:17:51PM +0400, Konovalov, Vadim wrote:
> One need to use correct re-encoding functions or write "\x{A0}" instead of
> \xA0
That shouldn't make any difference:
$ ./perl -Ilib -MDevel::Peek -e 'Dump "\xA0"'
SV = PV(0x985de28) at 0x985cce0
REFCNT = 1
FLAGS = (PADTMP,PO
Attached is a patch for a couple of random warnings I've looked at but
haven't gotten to fixing. The fix in nostdio.h is complained about
by gcc if compiling with -Wundef. The change in perl.c is complained about
by bcc without -DDEBUGGING. It looks like bcc dislike code like "if(0){".
Enjoy!
> However, this is *the* unfixable UTF-8 bug in Perl 5 - the
> fact that 1 bit
> is used as a flag that both signals "buffer is encoded as UTF-8" and
> "string should use Unicode rather than bytes semantics"
But may be those two concepts should be considered synonyms in this context?
Otherwise,
On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 12:37:44PM +0100, Steve Hay wrote:
> Simply choosing a bigger (well, more negative) number than -3600 in the
> test above also works, e.g. -7200 gives the correct result for GMT+1 but
> fails for GMT+2, etc. So using -50400 (-3600 * 14) should also do the
> trick.
There
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 12:41:34PM +0200, H.Merijn Brand wrote:
> I have the idea that the Encode part should be Cc's to Dan K, but this file
> is not mentioned in Maintainers.pl
'Encode' =>
{
'MAINTAINER'=> 'dankogai',
'FILES' => q[ext/Encode],
'CP
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 02:37:01AM -0700, Harald Joerg wrote:
> perl -MExtUtils::Embed -e xsinit -- -o perlxsi.c
>
> ...has problems if perl has been built with a static extension
> provided in a hints file.
>
> In the cygwin hints file for perl 5.8.7, after applying the
> patches from the di
On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 05:43:08PM -0500, David Nicol wrote:
> On 7/28/05, John P. Linderman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > is there any significant difference between "perl" and "Perl"?
>
> That is exactly the sort of edge case that is under discussion in
> this thread. One possibility is mai
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 04:01:05PM -0700, Christopher J. Madsen wrote:
> # New Ticket Created by "Christopher J. Madsen"
> # Please include the string: [perl #36839]
> # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
> # https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36839 >
# New Ticket Created by "Christopher J. Madsen"
# Please include the string: [perl #36839]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36839 >
This is a bug report for perl from [EMAIL PROTECTED],
generated with the hel
# New Ticket Created by Christopher Welsh
# Please include the string: [perl #36837]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=36837 >
This is a bug report for perl from [EMAIL PROTECTED],
generated with the help of p
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 10:58:48AM +0530, Sastry wrote:
> Hi
>
> I get 73 printed on EBCDIC platform. I think it is supposed to print
> 129 as it is the numeric equivalent of 'a'.
>
> -Sastry
>
>
>
> On 8/8/05, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On your EBCDIC platform, what does
Hi
I get 73 printed on EBCDIC platform. I think it is supposed to print
129 as it is the numeric equivalent of 'a'.
-Sastry
On 8/8/05, Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 11:51:44AM +0530, Sastry wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I am running the following script on EBCDI
30 matches
Mail list logo
