Re: [PATCH] END blocks may segfault

On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 02:49, Tim Bunce <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 09:50:00PM -0700, Fred Moyer wrote:
>> I think getting rid of the segfault is a good thing.  But if the main
>> problem is issues with NYTProf, then it seems like this change won't
>> solve the core problem of autogenerated null end blocks faulting.  I'm
>> don't fully understand the scope of these issues yet, so my answers
>> (and questions) may not be completely helpful.

Well, the point of the test case is it does not use NYTProf.  Sure It
was found while playing with NYTProf. :)

> I suggest the code shift items off the main array, like perl does,
> but also push those items onto a new temp array.
> When there are no more items in the main array it would copy
> the items back again (av_make() is handy for that).

Wouldn't the list keep getting longer each time?  For example take
your test case:
END { eval "END { }" for 1..10 }

The first time we run them we should shift of 11 items. The next time
21, etc.  Am I missing something? Perhaps some cool trick?  Thats why
I was thinking local() or equiv would make the most sense.

Hrm?