Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
We don't bite newbies here... much
 
PerlMonks  

Re: Regex re_eval - requires explicit package name

by Anonymous Monk
on Jan 20, 2013 at 10:50 UTC ( #1014282=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Regex re_eval - requires explicit package name

Should I consider this a bug?

I think probably not, I vaguely recall that with this experimental feature, you're supposed to use dynamic/local vars instead of lexical/my vars

update: Re: (??{ code }) versus (?PARNO) for recursive regular expressions (lexicals won't stay shared ), Variable scoping oddity inside (??{ ... }), (??{ lexical variable }), Scoping issues with code evaluation asserstions?


Comment on Re: Regex re_eval - requires explicit package name
Re^2: Regex re_eval - requires explicit package name
by dave_the_m (Parson) on Jan 20, 2013 at 14:02 UTC
    I vaguely recall that with this experimental feature, you're supposed to use dynamic/local vars instead of lexical/my vars
    That's because the code was exceedingly buggy and would usually use the wrong pad, resulting in unexpected behaviour or seg faults before 5.17.1 (for which I completely rewrote the feature). Its now safe and sane to use lexicals, modulo any new bugs I may have introduced.

    Dave.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1014282]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others rifling through the Monastery: (11)
As of 2014-12-22 13:10 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    Is guessing a good strategy for surviving in the IT business?





    Results (117 votes), past polls