Fix for Perl 5.14

Perl 5.14.0-RC1 came out a few days ago...

There is a minor compile time error due to the API changing a bit:
plperl.c:929:3: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment

This is due to GvCV() no longer returning an lvalue, instead they want
us to use the new GvCV_set macro. (see
http://search.cpan.org/~jesse/perl-5.14.0-RC1/pod/perldelta.pod#GvCV()_and_GvGP()_are_no_longer_lvalues)

Unfortunately that macro is not available on older perls so the
attached provides our own macro when GvCV_set is not defined.

Tested with 5.14.0-rc1 and 5.12.3.

The -head patch applies with fuzz to 9.0. The 8.4 patch applies clean
to 8.4 and with fuzz to 8.3 and 8.2.

On 04/23/2011 03:02 AM, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
> Perl 5.14.0-RC1 came out a few days ago...
>
> There is a minor compile time error due to the API changing a bit:
> plperl.c:929:3: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment
>
> This is due to GvCV() no longer returning an lvalue, instead they want
> us to use the new GvCV_set macro. (see
> http://search.cpan.org/~jesse/perl-5.14.0-RC1/pod/perldelta.pod#GvCV()_and_GvGP()_are_no_longer_lvalues)
>
> Unfortunately that macro is not available on older perls so the
> attached provides our own macro when GvCV_set is not defined.
>
> Tested with 5.14.0-rc1 and 5.12.3.
>
> The -head patch applies with fuzz to 9.0. The 8.4 patch applies clean
> to 8.4 and with fuzz to 8.3 and 8.2.

How nice of them not to fix it in ppport.h. I thought this is exactly
the sort of thing it's for.

This looks OK, but I think we need to wait until they remove the RC tag.

cheers

andrew

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 07:00, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>
>
> On 04/23/2011 03:02 AM, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
>> ...
>> There is a minor compile time error due to the API changing a bit:
>> plperl.c:929:3: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment
>> ...
>> Unfortunately  that macro is not available on older perls so the
>> attached provides our own macro when GvCV_set is not defined.

> How nice of them not to fix it in ppport.h. I thought this is exactly the
> sort of thing it's for.

Hrm, I have the latest released version of Devel::PPPort, 3.19. I went
poking around and found the have a newer "developer" release (3.19_03)
at http://search.cpan.org/~mhx/Devel-PPPort-3.19_03/ (released
2011-04-13). I see a few things for 5.14 but nothing about GvCV_set.
Maybe I'm doing something wrong? I'm just diffing its ppport.h with
ours. For the curious its attached.

> This looks OK, but I think we need to wait until they remove the RC tag.

Makes sense, Ill repost once they do ;).

2011/4/23 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
> On 04/23/2011 03:02 AM, Alex Hunsaker wrote:
>>
>> Perl 5.14.0-RC1 came out a few days ago...
>>
>> There is a minor compile time error due to the API changing a bit:
>> plperl.c:929:3: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment
>>
>> This is due to GvCV() no longer returning an lvalue, instead they want
>> us to use the new GvCV_set macro. (see
>>
>> http://search.cpan.org/~jesse/perl-5.14.0-RC1/pod/perldelta.pod#GvCV()_and_GvGP()_are_no_longer_lvalues)
>>
>> Unfortunately  that macro is not available on older perls so the
>> attached provides our own macro when GvCV_set is not defined.
>>
>> Tested with 5.14.0-rc1 and 5.12.3.
>>
>> The -head patch applies with fuzz to 9.0. The 8.4 patch applies clean
>> to 8.4 and with fuzz to 8.3 and 8.2.
>
>
> How nice of them not to fix it in ppport.h. I thought this is exactly the
> sort of thing it's for.

It's not so easy to convert
foo = GvCV(bah);
to a
GvCV_set(foo, bar);
with a ppport.h macro automatically.

But yes, the backport GvCV_set => lvalue GvCV should be in ppport.h.
It is not yet
--
Reini Urban

On Sat, Apr 23, 2011 at 07:00, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:

> This looks OK, but I think we need to wait until they remove the RC tag.

5.14.0 is out now, Ive retested with 5.14.0 (x86-64), 5.12.3 (x86-64)
and 5.10.1 (i386). No changes are needed.

[ if you missed it ]
The Devel::PPPort guy said patches are welcome and he won't be able to
look into this until at least june.