Right! Before we get into a harranging match, I don't think that you studied the program output from my last post properly. If you did, then we are simply agreeing, but do not know it yet :).

The point I was making, was that on Win32, I never get any indication that your snippet crashes on my machine. Nothing. Zip. Nada. Not a jot:)

  • Nothing in the system or application event logs that always log if an program segfaults or otherwise terminates abnormally.
  • Nothing on the terminal that indicates anything is at fault--except the complete absence of your "Alive!" message. (which is something, but only in the "it didn't happen" way, and could not be classed as "a crash!".
  • No Dr. Watson, or system pop-up telling me that perl crashed in some way.

    So, by your description of "crash", I assumed you were getting some indication on your system that Perl had crashed--such as the "core dumped" message.

    If you are not getting this message, then your characterisation of this as a "crash" maybe accurate, in as much as Perl is certainly taking an abnormal path to completetion, but I usually associate the term "crash" with something the OS becomes aware of and reports, rather than (as now seems a possible interpretation of your use of that term) an internal to perl, "bottle out of here cos we're confused and don't bother telling the user anything" behaviour that I am seeing.

    To put that more clearly, calling substr in a lvalue context, with parameters that lie entirely outside the target string, causes a fatal-but-silent termination of the Perl process.

    If this is the behaviour that you are seeing under HP/UX, then I agree it is most definitely worthy of the term "Perl oddity", and I apologies for my having misunderstood you.

    It does not however, cause what I would term a "crash", at least on my system. :)

    So, are we agreeing; disagreeing; agreeing to disagree or disagreeing to agree?

    I'd like to achieve the former but I would settle for the second to last, but I think I have acquired a reputation for tending to the latter--though, of course, I disagree with that assessment :)

    Examine what is said, not who speaks.
    Silence betokens consent.
    Love the truth but pardon error.

    In reply to Re^7: substr oddity by BrowserUk
    in thread Perl oddities by brian_d_foy

    Title:
    Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
    and:  <code> code here </code>
    to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.