Skip to content

Assert fail in Perl_sv_2pv_flags: '(vec%0,0,0)=0' #15370

Closed

Description

@p5pRT

Migrated from rt.perl.org#128260 (status was 'resolved')

Searchable as RT128260$

Activity

  1. p5pRT commented on May 27, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @dcollinsn

    Greetings Porters,

    I have compiled bleadperl with the afl-gcc compiler using​:

    ./Configure -Dusedevel -Dprefix='/usr/local/perl-afl' -Dcc='ccache afl-gcc' -Uuselongdouble -Duse64bitall -Doptimize=-g -Uversiononly -Uman1dir -Uman3dir -Dusequadmath -des
    AFL_HARDEN=1 make && make test

    And then fuzzed the resulting binary using​:

    AFL_NO_VAR_CHECK=1 afl-fuzz -i in -o out bin/perl @​@​

    After reducing testcases using `afl-tmin` and performing additional minimization by hand, I have located the following testcase that triggers an assert fail in debug buids of the perl interpreter. The testcase is the file below. On normal builds, this runs normally (albeit with an expected warning). On debug builds, this returns an assert fail.

    dcollins@​nightshade64​:~/perl$ ./perl -Ilib -e '(vec%0,0,0)=0'
    Illegal number of bits in vec at -e line 1.
    dcollins@​nightshade64​:~/perl$ cd ../perldebug/
    dcollins@​nightshade64​:~/perldebug$ ./perl -Ilib -e '(vec%0,0,0)=0'
    perl​: sv.c​:2924​: Perl_sv_2pv_flags​: Assertion `((svtype)((sv)->sv_flags & 0xff)) != SVt_PVAV && ((svtype)((sv)->sv_flags & 0xff)) != SVt_PVHV && ((svtype)((sv)->sv_flags & 0xff)) != SVt_PVFM' failed.
    Aborted

    Debugging tool output is below. A git bisect was performed and reported the following, which appears to be when the assert was initially added.

    217f6fa is the first bad commit
    commit 217f6fa
    Author​: Father Chrysostomos <sprout@​cpan.org>
    Date​: Fri Jul 19 08​:51​:47 2013 -0700

      sv.c​: Assert that sv_[ivp]v are not passed aggregates

      The lack of assertions can hide bugs. See 32a6097 for instance

    :100644 100644 3ac0a2bce83bc12406be1fa22acefa8f8a2014c7 daa87f00081d96c8d15f94f02c32cd85e8af0266 M sv.c
    bisect run success

    **GDB**

    dcollins@​nightshade64​:~/perldebug$ gdb --args ./miniperl -Ilib -e '((vec%0,0,0)=0)'
    GNU gdb (GDB) 7.10
    Copyright (C) 2015 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
    License GPLv3+​: GNU GPL version 3 or later <http​://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html>
    This is free software​: you are free to change and redistribute it.
    There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. Type "show copying"
    and "show warranty" for details.
    This GDB was configured as "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu".
    Type "show configuration" for configuration details.
    For bug reporting instructions, please see​:
    <http​://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/bugs/>.
    Find the GDB manual and other documentation resources online at​:
    <http​://www.gnu.org/software/gdb/documentation/>.
    For help, type "help".
    Type "apropos word" to search for commands related to "word"...
    Reading symbols from ./miniperl...done.
    (gdb) run
    Starting program​: /home/dcollins/perldebug/miniperl -Ilib -e \(\(vec%0,0,0\)=0\)
    [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
    Using host libthread_db library "/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libthread_db.so.1".
    miniperl​: sv.c​:2924​: Perl_sv_2pv_flags​: Assertion `((svtype)((sv)->sv_flags & 0xff)) != SVt_PVAV && ((svtype)((sv)->sv_flags & 0xff)) != SVt_PVHV && ((svtype)((sv)->sv_flags & 0xff)) != SVt_PVFM' failed.

    Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted.
    0x00007ffff6cf9478 in raise () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
    (gdb) bt
    #0 0x00007ffff6cf9478 in raise () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
    #1 0x00007ffff6cfa8fa in abort () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
    #2 0x00007ffff6cf23a7 in ?? () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
    #3 0x00007ffff6cf2452 in __assert_fail () from /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
    #4 0x00000000005b551c in Perl_sv_2pv_flags (sv=0xa959a8, lp=0x7fffffffe1e8, flags=2050)
      at sv.c​:2923
    #5 0x0000000000694542 in Perl_do_vecget (sv=0xa959a8, offset=0, size=0) at doop.c​:752
    #6 0x000000000061d3ab in Perl_pp_vec () at pp.c​:3509
    #7 0x000000000053fac1 in Perl_runops_debug () at dump.c​:2239
    #8 0x00000000004482ec in S_run_body (oldscope=1) at perl.c​:2517
    #9 0x0000000000447917 in perl_run (my_perl=0xa7f010) at perl.c​:2440
    #10 0x000000000072760b in main (argc=4, argv=0x7fffffffe618, env=0x7fffffffe640)
      at miniperlmain.c​:122
    (gdb) q

    **VALGRIND**

    No reported memory management errors.

    **PERL -V**

    dcollins@​nightshade64​:~/perldebug$ ./perl -Ilib -V
    Summary of my perl5 (revision 5 version 25 subversion 2) configuration​:
      Commit id​: c29dfc6
      Platform​:
      osname=linux, osvers=4.5.0-2-amd64, archname=x86_64-linux-ld
      uname='linux nightshade64 4.5.0-2-amd64 #1 smp debian 4.5.3-2 (2016-05-08) x86_64 gnulinux '
      config_args='-Dusedevel -Dprefix=/usr/local/perl-afl -Dcc=ccache gcc-6.1 -Duselongdouble -Duse64bitall -Doptimize=-g -Uversiononly -Uman1dir -Uman3dir -DDEBUGGING -DPERL_POISON -des'
      hint=recommended, useposix=true, d_sigaction=define
      useithreads=undef, usemultiplicity=undef
      use64bitint=define, use64bitall=define, uselongdouble=define
      usemymalloc=n, bincompat5005=undef
      Compiler​:
      cc='ccache gcc-6.1', ccflags ='-fwrapv -DDEBUGGING -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -fstack-protector-strong -I/usr/local/include -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64',
      optimize='-g',
      cppflags='-fwrapv -DDEBUGGING -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -fstack-protector-strong -I/usr/local/include'
      ccversion='', gccversion='6.1.0', gccosandvers=''
      intsize=4, longsize=8, ptrsize=8, doublesize=8, byteorder=12345678, doublekind=3
      d_longlong=define, longlongsize=8, d_longdbl=define, longdblsize=16, longdblkind=3
      ivtype='long', ivsize=8, nvtype='long double', nvsize=16, Off_t='off_t', lseeksize=8
      alignbytes=16, prototype=define
      Linker and Libraries​:
      ld='ccache gcc-6.1', ldflags =' -fstack-protector-strong -L/usr/local/lib'
      libpth=/usr/local/lib /usr/local/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/6.1.0/include-fixed /usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu /usr/lib /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu /lib/../lib /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu /usr/lib/../lib /lib
      libs=-lpthread -lnsl -ldl -lm -lcrypt -lutil -lc
      perllibs=-lpthread -lnsl -ldl -lm -lcrypt -lutil -lc
      libc=libc-2.22.so, so=so, useshrplib=false, libperl=libperl.a
      gnulibc_version='2.22'
      Dynamic Linking​:
      dlsrc=dl_dlopen.xs, dlext=so, d_dlsymun=undef, ccdlflags='-Wl,-E'
      cccdlflags='-fPIC', lddlflags='-shared -g -L/usr/local/lib -fstack-protector-strong'

    Characteristics of this binary (from libperl)​:
      Compile-time options​: DEBUGGING HAS_TIMES PERLIO_LAYERS PERL_COPY_ON_WRITE
      PERL_DONT_CREATE_GVSV
      PERL_HASH_FUNC_ONE_AT_A_TIME_HARD PERL_MALLOC_WRAP
      PERL_OP_PARENT PERL_PRESERVE_IVUV PERL_USE_DEVEL
      USE_64_BIT_ALL USE_64_BIT_INT USE_LARGE_FILES
      USE_LOCALE USE_LOCALE_COLLATE USE_LOCALE_CTYPE
      USE_LOCALE_NUMERIC USE_LOCALE_TIME USE_LONG_DOUBLE
      USE_PERLIO USE_PERL_ATOF
      Built under linux
      Compiled at May 26 2016 17​:57​:37
      @​INC​:
      lib
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/site_perl/5.25.2/x86_64-linux-ld
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/site_perl/5.25.2
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/5.25.2/x86_64-linux-ld
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/5.25.2
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/site_perl/5.25.1
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/site_perl/5.24.0
      /usr/local/perl-afl/lib/site_perl
      .

  2. p5pRT commented on May 27, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu May 26 18​:52​:05 2016, dcollinsn@​gmail.com wrote​:

    A git bisect was performed and
    reported the following, which appears to be when the assert was
    initially added.

    217f6fa is the first bad commit
    commit 217f6fa
    Author​: Father Chrysostomos <sprout@​cpan.org>
    Date​: Fri Jul 19 08​:51​:47 2013 -0700

    sv.c​: Assert that sv_[ivp]v are not passed aggregates

    The lack of assertions can hide bugs. See 32a6097 for instance

    That assertion was added specifically to find bugs like this​:

    $ perl -we '(vec%0,0,1)=0'
    Use of uninitialized value within %0 in vec at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in aassign at -e line 1.

    That output is nonsensical.

    Thank you for finding one. :-)

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  3. p5pRT commented on May 27, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open'

  4. p5pRT commented on May 27, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu May 26 21​:38​:50 2016, sprout wrote​:

    On Thu May 26 18​:52​:05 2016, dcollinsn@​gmail.com wrote​:

    A git bisect was performed and
    reported the following, which appears to be when the assert was
    initially added.

    217f6fa is the first bad commit
    commit 217f6fa
    Author​: Father Chrysostomos <sprout@​cpan.org>
    Date​: Fri Jul 19 08​:51​:47 2013 -0700

    sv.c​: Assert that sv_[ivp]v are not passed aggregates

    The lack of assertions can hide bugs. See 32a6097 for instance

    That assertion was added specifically to find bugs like this​:

    $ perl -we '(vec%0,0,1)=0'
    Use of uninitialized value within %0 in vec at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in aassign at -e line 1.

    That output is nonsensical.

    Thank you for finding one. :-)

    A related issue is that prototype("CORE​::vec") returns '$$$', but vec’s first argument must be a valid lvalue, so the prototype is wrong​:

    $ perl -we '(vec $_+1,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify addition (+) in list assignment at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
    $ perl -we 'vec($_+1,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify addition (+) in scalar assignment at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

    It’s prototype currently is effectively ‘\[$@​%*]$$’, but it should probably be ‘\$$$’.

    Also, those ‘Can't modify’ messages cite the wrong op (list/scalar assignment instead of vec).

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  5. p5pRT commented on May 28, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu May 26 21​:58​:20 2016, sprout wrote​:

    On Thu May 26 21​:38​:50 2016, sprout wrote​:

    On Thu May 26 18​:52​:05 2016, dcollinsn@​gmail.com wrote​:

    A git bisect was performed and
    reported the following, which appears to be when the assert was
    initially added.

    217f6fa is the first bad commit
    commit 217f6fa
    Author​: Father Chrysostomos <sprout@​cpan.org>
    Date​: Fri Jul 19 08​:51​:47 2013 -0700

    sv.c​: Assert that sv_[ivp]v are not passed aggregates

    The lack of assertions can hide bugs. See 32a6097 for
    instance

    That assertion was added specifically to find bugs like this​:

    $ perl -we '(vec%0,0,1)=0'
    Use of uninitialized value within %0 in vec at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in aassign at -e line 1.

    That output is nonsensical.

    Thank you for finding one. :-)

    A related issue is that prototype("CORE​::vec") returns '$$$', but
    vec’s first argument must be a valid lvalue, so the prototype is
    wrong​:

    $ perl -we '(vec $_+1,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify addition (+) in list assignment at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
    $ perl -we 'vec($_+1,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify addition (+) in scalar assignment at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

    It’s prototype currently is effectively ‘\[$@​%*]$$’, but it should
    probably be ‘\$$$’.

    It’s more complicated than that. vec does accept $_+1 if vec itself is in rvalue context, so its actual behaviour cannot be represented perfectly with a prototype.

    Also, those ‘Can't modify’ messages cite the wrong op (list/scalar
    assignment instead of vec).

    That’s actually a clue to the problem. Scalar assignment dies at compile time, but list assignment goes on to do the wrong thing (and fail an assertion) at run time, because vec’s own type of lvalue context is being propagated, whereas it probably should not be.

    $ perl -we 'vec(%a,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify hash dereference in scalar assignment at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
    $ perl -we '(vec%a,0,1)=0'
    Name "main​::a" used only once​: possible typo at -e line 1.
    Use of uninitialized value within %a in vec at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in aassign at -e line 1.

    vec is not the only problematic operator.

    $ ./perl -we '(substr %a,0,1)=0'
    Name "main​::a" used only once​: possible typo at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in list assignment at -e line 1.
    $ ./perl -we 'substr(%a,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify hash dereference in scalar assignment at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

    The second one dies at compile time; the first one does the wrong thing at run time. Same problem.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  6. p5pRT commented on Jun 9, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Fri May 27 17​:55​:20 2016, sprout wrote​:

    It’s more complicated than that. vec does accept $_+1 if vec itself
    is in rvalue context, so its actual behaviour cannot be represented
    perfectly with a prototype.

    Also, those ‘Can't modify’ messages cite the wrong op (list/scalar
    assignment instead of vec).

    That’s actually a clue to the problem. Scalar assignment dies at
    compile time, but list assignment goes on to do the wrong thing (and
    fail an assertion) at run time, because vec’s own type of lvalue
    context is being propagated, whereas it probably should not be.

    $ perl -we 'vec(%a,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify hash dereference in scalar assignment at -e line 1, at
    EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
    $ perl -we '(vec%a,0,1)=0'
    Name "main​::a" used only once​: possible typo at -e line 1.
    Use of uninitialized value within %a in vec at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in aassign at -e line 1.

    vec is not the only problematic operator.

    $ ./perl -we '(substr %a,0,1)=0'
    Name "main​::a" used only once​: possible typo at -e line 1.
    Can't coerce HASH to string in list assignment at -e line 1.
    $ ./perl -we 'substr(%a,0,1)=0'
    Can't modify hash dereference in scalar assignment at -e line 1, at
    EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

    The second one dies at compile time; the first one does the wrong
    thing at run time. Same problem.

    Should assignment to substr(keys) be allowed?

    $ ./perl -le 'substr(keys %h,1) = 3; print "ok"'
    ok
    $ ./perl -e '(substr keys %h,1) = 3;'
    Can't modify keys in list assignment at -e line 1, near "3;"
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

    (The logic in op.c​:op_lvalue_flags is really broken.)

    Currently assignment to substr(keys) actually does something​:

    $ ./perl -le 'substr(keys %h,1) = 3; use Devel​::Peek; Dump %h'
    ok
    SV = PVHV(0x7fb14c00aea0) at 0x7fb14c02b7e0
      REFCNT = 1
      FLAGS = (OOK,SHAREKEYS)
      AUX_FLAGS = 0
      ARRAY = 0x7fb14bc09970
      KEYS = 0
      FILL = 0 (cached = 0)
      MAX = 7
      RITER = -1
      EITER = 0x0
      RAND = 0x34097f19
    $ ./perl -le 'substr(keys %h,1) = 30; use Devel​::Peek; Dump %h'
    ok
    SV = PVHV(0x7fa35880aea0) at 0x7fa35882b7e0
      REFCNT = 1
      FLAGS = (OOK,SHAREKEYS)
      AUX_FLAGS = 0
      ARRAY = 0x7fa358412350
      KEYS = 0
      FILL = 0 (cached = 0)
      MAX = 31
      RITER = -1
      EITER = 0x0
      RAND = 0x77bd0a5d

    (See the MAX line, indicating the highest bucket index.)

    I just want to know if I should go ahead and break that, which would be the easiest way to fix the other bugs in this ticket.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  7. p5pRT commented on Jun 9, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu Jun 09 07​:03​:06 2016, sprout wrote​:

    $ ./perl -le 'substr(keys %h,1) = 3; use Devel​::Peek; Dump %h'
    ok
    SV = PVHV(0x7fb14c00aea0) at 0x7fb14c02b7e0

    Duh. Ignore the ‘ok’. (Shouldn’t reduce scripts *after* copying and pasting them!)

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  8. p5pRT commented on Jun 9, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @ikegami

    On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10​:03 AM, Father Chrysostomos via RT <
    perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    Should assignment to substr(keys) be allowed?

    Is there a reason it shouldn't?

    substr(keys)=... isn't too useful, but vec(substr)=... might be useful

    (I'm assuming substr/keys/vec/$#a are interchangeable in that question, as
    they are the ops that return magical values in lvalue context.)

  9. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu Jun 09 13​:31​:21 2016, ikegami@​adaelis.com wrote​:

    On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10​:03 AM, Father Chrysostomos via RT <
    perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    Should assignment to substr(keys) be allowed?

    Is there a reason it shouldn't?

    substr(keys)=... isn't too useful, but vec(substr)=... might be useful

    The fix I have in my head would allow vec(substr)=....

    (I'm assuming substr/keys/vec/$#a are interchangeable in that question, as
    they are the ops that return magical values in lvalue context.)

    keys() is extra extra special. keys() assignment only works in scalar assignment, not list assignment. The whole thing is a kludge, really. :-)

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  10. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu Jun 09 18​:21​:57 2016, sprout wrote​:

    On Thu Jun 09 13​:31​:21 2016, ikegami@​adaelis.com wrote​:

    On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 10​:03 AM, Father Chrysostomos via RT <
    perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    Should assignment to substr(keys) be allowed?

    Is there a reason it shouldn't?

    substr(keys)=... isn't too useful, but vec(substr)=... might be
    useful

    The fix I have in my head would allow vec(substr)=....

    (I'm assuming substr/keys/vec/$#a are interchangeable in that
    question, as
    they are the ops that return magical values in lvalue context.)

    keys() is extra extra special. keys() assignment only works in scalar
    assignment, not list assignment. The whole thing is a kludge, really.
    :-)

    Hrm, I did not realize this, but foreach(scalar keys %h) gives a magic keys scalar as do foo(scalar keys %h), \scalar keys %h, and grep $_, scalar keys %h.

    (keys %h) = is not permitted though. Maybe it’s because that is list context. That seems the only logical reason. Only a scalar-context keys can give a magic assignable scalar.

    I guess I need to make substr(keys)= work. Now that I understand this code better, it shouldn’t be too hard.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  11. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Thu Jun 09 18​:31​:45 2016, sprout wrote​:

    Hrm, I did not realize this, but foreach(scalar keys %h) gives a magic
    keys scalar as do foo(scalar keys %h), \scalar keys %h, and grep $_,
    scalar keys %h.

    (keys %h) = is not permitted though. Maybe it’s because that is
    list context. That seems the only logical reason. Only a scalar-
    context keys can give a magic assignable scalar.

    I guess I need to make substr(keys)= work. Now that I understand this
    code better, it shouldn’t be too hard.

    keys(%h) works in some lvalue scalar contexts, but not others​:

    $ ./perl -Ilib -e 'keys(%h).="00"'
    Can't modify keys in concatenation (.) or string at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.
    $ ./perl -Ilib -e 'read FH, keys(%h), 0'
    Can't modify keys in read at -e line 1, at EOF
    Execution of -e aborted due to compilation errors.

    keys has its own list of exceptions for the lvalue type. If I were to make it use the same logic as other ops that make a distinction between scalar and list lvalue context (by calling S_scalar_mod_type), then it would be easier not to break it when fixing other bugs, and I could stop worrying about it. The .= and read examples above would start working, which would be good (though no sane code would do that) since it would be more predictable.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  12. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @iabyn

    On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 10​:51​:12PM -0700, Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote​:

    I guess I need to make substr(keys)= work. Now that I understand this
    code better, it shouldn’t be too hard.

    So would

      substr(keys %h, ...) = foo;

    be equivalent to​:

      my $k = keys %h;
      substr($k, ....) = foo;
      keys %h = $k;

    --
    All wight. I will give you one more chance. This time, I want to hear
    no Wubens. No Weginalds. No Wudolf the wed-nosed weindeers.
      -- Life of Brian

  13. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Fri Jun 10 01​:22​:52 2016, davem wrote​:

    On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 10​:51​:12PM -0700, Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote​:

    I guess I need to make substr(keys)= work. Now that I understand this
    code better, it shouldn’t be too hard.

    So would

    substr\(keys %h\, \.\.\.\) = foo;
    

    be equivalent to​:

    my $k = keys %h;
    substr\($k\, \.\.\.\.\) = foo;
    keys %h = $k;
    

    It already is. :-)

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  14. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @demerphq

    On 10 June 2016 at 17​:31, Father Chrysostomos via RT
    <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    On Fri Jun 10 01​:22​:52 2016, davem wrote​:

    On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 10​:51​:12PM -0700, Father Chrysostomos via RT wrote​:

    I guess I need to make substr(keys)= work. Now that I understand this
    code better, it shouldn’t be too hard.

    So would

    substr\(keys %h\, \.\.\.\) = foo;
    

    be equivalent to​:

    my $k = keys %h;
    substr\($k\, \.\.\.\.\) = foo;
    keys %h = $k;
    

    It already is. :-)

    So when or if we switch our hash implementation to something where
    this type of syntax does not make sense what are we going to do with
    this code?

    I really feel like this goes in the wrong direction. We should be
    moving towards making assignment to keys a no-op, not making it work
    better and in more situations.

    Yves

  15. p5pRT commented on Jun 10, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Fri Jun 10 10​:23​:31 2016, demerphq wrote​:

    On 10 June 2016 at 17​:31, Father Chrysostomos via RT
    <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    On Fri Jun 10 01​:22​:52 2016, davem wrote​:

    On Thu, Jun 09, 2016 at 10​:51​:12PM -0700, Father Chrysostomos via RT
    wrote​:

    I guess I need to make substr(keys)= work. Now that I
    understand this
    code better, it shouldn’t be too hard.

    So would

    substr(keys %h, ...) = foo;

    be equivalent to​:

    my $k = keys %h;
    substr($k, ....) = foo;
    keys %h = $k;

    It already is. :-)

    So when or if we switch our hash implementation to something where
    this type of syntax does not make sense what are we going to do with
    this code?

    I really feel like this goes in the wrong direction. We should be
    moving towards making assignment to keys a no-op, not making it work
    better and in more situations.

    Aha. I thought you were going to speak up along those lines. Until we actually remove keys assignment, I have no intention of accidentally breaking it. By making it share code with other ops, instead of having its own special cases (and this sharing has the side effect of allowing .= etc.), I can stop worrying about it and get on with fixing other bugs.

    As for what keys(%h)= should do if we want to change that, I have no idea. Nor do I have much interest. All I am doing is changing the code surrounding the *syntax*, not the actual implementation of keys lvalues, in order to make it easier to fix other syntax bugs, such as those discussed earlier in this ticket.

    Make sense?

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  16. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Fri Jun 10 13​:06​:29 2016, sprout wrote, in response to Yves Orton​:

    Aha. I thought you were going to speak up along those lines. Until
    we actually remove keys assignment, I have no intention of
    accidentally breaking it. By making it share code with other ops,
    instead of having its own special cases (and this sharing has the side
    effect of allowing .= etc.), I can stop worrying about it and get on
    with fixing other bugs.

    As for what keys(%h)= should do if we want to change that, I have no
    idea. Nor do I have much interest. All I am doing is changing the
    code surrounding the *syntax*, not the actual implementation of keys
    lvalues, in order to make it easier to fix other syntax bugs, such as
    those discussed earlier in this ticket.

    Make sense?

    I do hope you respond soon. I have a branch waiting to be merged (smoke-me/128260), but I won’t merge it if there are still objections.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  17. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @ap

    * demerphq <demerphq@​gmail.com> [2016-06-10 19​:24]​:

    So when or if we switch our hash implementation to something where
    this type of syntax does not make sense what are we going to do with
    this code?

    If assignment to keys() really ought to become a no-op, then it should
    be made it do nothing silently. It should definitely not throw errors,
    since it continues to do something useful on old perls and there is no
    gain from forcing users to go into their code and delete it or version-
    guard it.

    I really feel like this goes in the wrong direction. We should be
    moving towards making assignment to keys a no-op, not making it work
    better and in more situations.

    I think it’s going in the right direction as well as the wrong direction
    at the same time. Making assignment to keys less special seems just as
    useful for making it a silent no-op as for making it work better and in
    more situations.

    However, I disagree with the premise. The specific notion of “allocate
    this number of hash buckets” may make no sense for other implementations
    but an abstract intent of “pre-allocate extra space in this hash since
    I am about to add a bunch of data” seems like it would be applicable no
    matter the implementation chosen, just as the same intent is applicable
    and expressible for arrays too.

    Regards,
    --
    Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http​://plasmasturm.org/>

  18. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @demerphq

    Sorry. Yes i understand now. Please go ahead, i just get grumpy about this
    abstraction violation, but you are right to want the syntax to be bug free.
    Ill try to restrain my grumpy side in the future. :-)
    On 11 Jun 2016 05​:02, "Father Chrysostomos via RT" <
    perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    On Fri Jun 10 13​:06​:29 2016, sprout wrote, in response to Yves Orton​:

    Aha. I thought you were going to speak up along those lines. Until
    we actually remove keys assignment, I have no intention of
    accidentally breaking it. By making it share code with other ops,
    instead of having its own special cases (and this sharing has the side
    effect of allowing .= etc.), I can stop worrying about it and get on
    with fixing other bugs.

    As for what keys(%h)= should do if we want to change that, I have no
    idea. Nor do I have much interest. All I am doing is changing the
    code surrounding the *syntax*, not the actual implementation of keys
    lvalues, in order to make it easier to fix other syntax bugs, such as
    those discussed earlier in this ticket.

    Make sense?

    I do hope you respond soon. I have a branch waiting to be merged
    (smoke-me/128260), but I won’t merge it if there are still objections.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos


    via perlbug​: queue​: perl5 status​: open
    https://rt-archive.perl.org/perl5/Ticket/Display.html?id=128260

  19. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @demerphq

    On 11 Jun 2016 05​:35, "Aristotle Pagaltzis" <pagaltzis@​gmx.de> wrote​:

    * demerphq <demerphq@​gmail.com> [2016-06-10 19​:24]​:

    So when or if we switch our hash implementation to something where
    this type of syntax does not make sense what are we going to do with
    this code?

    If assignment to keys() really ought to become a no-op, then it should
    be made it do nothing silently. It should definitely not throw errors,
    since it continues to do something useful on old perls and there is no
    gain from forcing users to go into their code and delete it or version-
    guard it.

    While i have sympathy about the point about back compat and guarding i
    still think assignment to keys should be replaced by a generic tool in
    hash​::util that would be responsible for configuring our associative arrays.

    If things were done carefully you would be able to write new style code
    that worked fine on older perls. For instance imagine​:

    conf_hash (%hash, min_keys => 1000, some_new_prop => 5);

    Which on older perls would be the same as assigning 1000 to keys, and on
    newer perls would set some other property of the algorithm.

    I really feel like this goes in the wrong direction. We should be
    moving towards making assignment to keys a no-op, not making it work
    better and in more situations.

    I think it’s going in the right direction as well as the wrong direction
    at the same time. Making assignment to keys less special seems just as
    useful for making it a silent no-op as for making it work better and in
    more situations.

    However, I disagree with the premise. The specific notion of “allocate
    this number of hash buckets” may make no sense for other implementations
    but an abstract intent of “pre-allocate extra space in this hash since
    I am about to add a bunch of data” seems like it would be applicable no
    matter the implementation chosen, just as the same intent is applicable
    and expressible for arrays too.

    While i concede that some of the algorithms we might choose could have such
    a config parameter i think its just as likely or more that we would choose
    an algorithm, like a balanced tree, where it does not make sense, and/or
    where there might be more than one option you can twiddle.

    Making all this explicit and future back compat proof seems to me to be
    long term preferable to preserving this language eccentricity.

    I will try to find time soon to start a fresh thread that summarizes my
    thoughts on this so we can discuss it properly.

    Yves

  20. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Sat Jun 11 01​:29​:31 2016, demerphq wrote​:

    Sorry. Yes i understand now. Please go ahead,

    Now pushed.

    e4fc708 makes keys consistent with other ops with regard to list vs scalar lvalue context.

    1a3e972 is a refactoring to prepare for the following commit.

    79409ac fixes the assertion failure originally reported in this ticket, making it a compile-time error, and also fixes the wording in the error messages to say ‘in vec’ and ‘in substr’.

    i just get grumpy about this
    abstraction violation,

    In fact, it has never really made much sense. keys %h = keys %h ought to be a no-op, but keys assignment specifies *buckets* whereas keys returns *keys*. If keys %h = 200 simply hinted that there would be about 200 keys soon, it would not be an abstraction violation, would it?

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  21. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    @cpansprout - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved'

  22. p5pRT commented on Jun 11, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    @cpansprout - Status changed from 'resolved' to 'pending release'

  23. p5pRT commented on Jun 12, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @demerphq

    On 11 June 2016 at 16​:27, Father Chrysostomos via RT
    <perlbug-followup@​perl.org> wrote​:

    On Sat Jun 11 01​:29​:31 2016, demerphq wrote​:

    Sorry. Yes i understand now. Please go ahead,

    Now pushed.

    e4fc708 makes keys consistent with other ops with regard to list vs scalar lvalue context.

    1a3e972 is a refactoring to prepare for the following commit.

    79409ac fixes the assertion failure originally reported in this ticket, making it a compile-time error, and also fixes the wording in the error messages to say ‘in vec’ and ‘in substr’.

    i just get grumpy about this
    abstraction violation,

    In fact, it has never really made much sense. keys %h = keys %h ought to be a no-op, but keys assignment specifies *buckets* whereas keys returns *keys*.

    Yeah, I agree. Syntactically it is very odd.

    If keys %h = 200 simply hinted that there would be about 200 keys soon, it would not be an abstraction violation, would it?

    Effectively that is what it does. With our current implementation it
    says "make sure there are at least 200 buckets", and that is it.

    And I suppose you are right, if you think of it as a hint of that sort
    then I guess it is harmless.

    I guess we don't have to get rid of it, we can just add something new
    that supplants it. It still bugs me that people have to waste their
    time fixing something that shouldn't really exist. But I shouldn't let
    that frustration get me annoyed with people like you who are just
    dealing with what we have. I apologise for that.

    Yves

    --
    perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"

  24. p5pRT commented on Jun 12, 2016

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @cpansprout

    On Sat Jun 11 07​:27​:38 2016, sprout wrote​:

    79409ac fixes the assertion failure originally reported in this
    ticket, making it a compile-time error,

    Except I fell into the same trap as the original bug, and that is to allow an HV or AV to pass to SV-only functions, by still propagating the outer lvalue context for \substr %h. I fixed that in 33a1032.

    --

    Father Chrysostomos

  25. p5pRT commented on May 30, 2017

    @p5pRT
    Author

    From @khwilliamson

    Thank you for filing this report. You have helped make Perl better.

    With the release today of Perl 5.26.0, this and 210 other issues have been
    resolved.

    Perl 5.26.0 may be downloaded via​:
    https://metacpan.org/release/XSAWYERX/perl-5.26.0

    If you find that the problem persists, feel free to reopen this ticket.

  26. p5pRT commented on May 30, 2017

    @p5pRT
    Author

    @khwilliamson - Status changed from 'pending release' to 'resolved'

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions