From owner-freebsd-perl@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 10 08:53:59 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: perl@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-perl@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE78C16A420; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 08:53:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from devin@spamcop.net) Received: from mail.distalzou.net (203.141.139.231.user.ad.il24.net [203.141.139.231]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C34C43D86; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 08:53:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from devin@spamcop.net) Received: from plexi.pun-pun.prv ([192.168.7.29] helo=plexi) by mail.distalzou.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.60 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1F7U2G-000Kac-AT; Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:53:48 +0900 Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 17:53:47 +0900 (JST) From: Tod McQuillin X-X-Sender: devin@plexi.pun-pun.prv To: Anton Berezin In-Reply-To: <200602100842.k1A8gkKJ065130@freefall.freebsd.org> Message-ID: <20060210175230.W64085@plexi.pun-pun.prv> References: <200602100842.k1A8gkKJ065130@freefall.freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: perl@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/93122: [PATCH] www/p5-HTML-Parser: [fix build on 4.x] X-BeenThere: freebsd-perl@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: maintainer of a number of perl-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 08:53:59 -0000 On Fri, 10 Feb 2006, Anton Berezin wrote: > Synopsis: [PATCH] www/p5-HTML-Parser: [fix build on 4.x] > > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > State-Changed-By: tobez > State-Changed-When: Fri Feb 10 09:42:46 CET 2006 > State-Changed-Why: > Whoops, I fixed it independently with a slightly different patch before > seeing your PR. Thanks anyway. I thought about doing it your way but I wasn't sure if accessing ->offset, ->line, ->column would be valid if ->eof was true. But comparing with version 3.48 I see it used to access them without checking so I guess it's okay. It does change the meaning of the code though. -- Tod