if (is_our && (SvPAD_OUR(sv)))
break; /* "our" masking "our" */
Perl_warner(aTHX_ packWARN(WARN_MISC),
- "\"%s\" variable %s masks earlier declaration in same %s",
+ "\"%s\" variable %"SVf" masks earlier declaration in same %s",
(is_our ? "our" : PL_parser->in_my == KEY_my ? "my" : "state"),
- name,
+ sv,
(COP_SEQ_RANGE_HIGH(sv) == PAD_MAX ? "scope" : "statement"));
--off;
break;
&& strEQ(name, SvPVX_const(sv)))
{
Perl_warner(aTHX_ packWARN(WARN_MISC),
- "\"our\" variable %s redeclared", name);
+ "\"our\" variable %"SVf" redeclared", sv);
if ((I32)off <= PL_comppad_name_floor)
Perl_warner(aTHX_ packWARN(WARN_MISC),
"\t(Did you mean \"local\" instead of \"our\"?)\n");
*/
PADOFFSET
-Perl_pad_findmy(pTHX_ const char *name)
+Perl_pad_findmy(pTHX_ const char *name, STRLEN len, U32 flags)
{
dVAR;
SV *out_sv;
PERL_ARGS_ASSERT_PAD_FINDMY;
pad_peg("pad_findmy");
+
+ if (flags)
+ Perl_croak(aTHX_ "panic: pad_findmy illegal flag bits 0x%" UVxf,
+ (UV)flags);
+
+ /* Yes, it is a bug (read work in progress) that we're not really using this
+ length parameter, and instead relying on strlen() later on. But I'm not
+ comfortable about changing the pad API piecemeal to use and rely on
+ lengths. This only exists to avoid an "unused parameter" warning. */
+ if (len < 2)
+ return NOT_IN_PAD;
+
+ /* But until we're using the length for real, cross check that we're being
+ told the truth. */
+ assert(strlen(name) == len);
+
offset = pad_findlex(name, PL_compcv, PL_cop_seqmax, 1,
NULL, &out_sv, &out_flags);
if ((PADOFFSET)offset != NOT_IN_PAD)