--- rajarshi das <dazio_r(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com> wrote:
--- Nicholas Clark <nick(_at_)ccl4(_dot_)org> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 08:34:02AM -0700, rajarshi
das wrote:
Yes, the second call to NATIVE_TO_UTF is still
present
in the modified code. Typically, one wouldnt
want
to
do a NATIVE_TO_UTF(NATIVE_TO_UTF(uv)) which is
what I
am doing due to the second call. But does that
make a
difference to miniperl ?
Well, the code is linked into miniperl, so I can
only assume that it's
getting called.
If so, does removing the second instance of
NATIVE_TO_UTF() improve things?
No it doesnt. The same error messages are generated.
However, if I change the first instance to :
--- utf8.c 2004-11-17 18:22:09.000000000 +0530
+++ utf8.c.2 2005-07-28 13:48:24.000000000 +0530
@@ -363,6 +363,11 @@ Perl_utf8n_to_uvuni(pTHX_ U8 *s,
STRLEN
warning = UTF8_WARN_EMPTY;
goto malformed;
}
+#ifdef EBCDIC
+ if (uv == 0xBA) {
+ uv = NATIVE_TO_UTF(uv);
+ }
+#endif
if (UTF8_IS_INVARIANT(uv)) {
if (retlen)
This allows gmake to complete.
Thanks for all your help on this.
Thanks,
Rajarshi.
Nicholas Clark
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
