On 30/05/07, Brandon Black <blblack gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/26/07, Jarkko Hietaniemi <jhiiki.fi> wrote:
> > : I think the best course of action to remedy this
is to treat it like
> > : HvAUX() (that is, add a comment in hv.h that
it's the responsibility
> > : of the caller to verify SvOOK before calling).
I looked around and
> > : most places where it's used it's already being
verified by the calling
> > : code (usually indirectly via HvNAME_get). I'll
whip up a patch that
> > : fixes the spots that aren't checking and takes
the SvOOK/NULL thing
> > : out of the macro, unless someone has a better
idea.
> >
> > Sounds like a plan to me.
>
> Attached is a patch for this.
Thanks, applied as #31312.
|