1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
|
#!perl
use strict;
use warnings;
BEGIN {
chdir 't';
require './test.pl';
}
plan(tests => 10);
my @warns;
local $SIG{__WARN__}= sub { push @warns, $_[0] };
my $error;
eval "require; 1" or $error = $@;
ok(1, "Check that eval 'require' does not segv");
ok(0 == @warns, "We expect the eval to die, without producing warnings");
like($error, qr/Missing or undefined argument to require/, "Make sure we got the error we expect");
@warns= ();
$error= undef;
sub TIESCALAR{bless[]}
sub STORE{}
sub FETCH{}
tie my $x, "";
$x = "x";
eval 'require $x; 1' or $error = $@;
ok(0 == @warns,
'no warnings from require $tied_undef_after_str_assignment');
like($error, qr/^Missing or undefined argument to require/,
"Make sure we got the error we expect");
@warns= ();
$error= undef;
$x = 3;
eval 'require $x; 1' or $error = $@;
ok(0 == @warns,
'no warnings from require $tied_undef_after_num_assignment');
like($error, qr/^Missing or undefined argument to require/,
"Make sure we got the error we expect");
@warns= ();
$error= undef;
*CORE::GLOBAL::require = *CORE::GLOBAL::require = sub { };
eval "require; 1" or $error = $@;
ok(1, "Check that eval 'require' on overloaded require does not segv");
ok(0 == @warns, "We expect the eval to die, without producing warnings");
# NOTE! The following test does NOT represent a commitment or promise that the following logic is
# the *right* thing to do. It may well not be. But this is how it works now, and we want to test it.
# IOW, do not use this test as the basis to argue that this is how it SHOULD work. Thanks, yves.
ok(!defined($error), "We do not expect the overloaded version of require to die from no arguments");
|
