truncate(${\1} ? foo : bar, 0) and truncate(1 ? foo : bar, 0) should
behave the same way, but were treated differently, due to the way ?:
is folded in the latter case. Now that foldedness is recorded in the
op tree (
cc2ebcd7902), we can use the OPpCONST_FOLDED flag to distin-
guish truncate(1 ? foo : bar, 0) from truncate(foo, 0).
if (kid->op_type == OP_NULL)
kid = (SVOP*)kid->op_sibling;
if (kid && kid->op_type == OP_CONST &&
- (kid->op_private & OPpCONST_BARE))
+ (kid->op_private & (OPpCONST_BARE|OPpCONST_FOLDED))
+ == OPpCONST_BARE)
{
o->op_flags |= OPf_SPECIAL;
kid->op_private &= ~OPpCONST_STRICT;
# we've not yet verified that use works.
# use strict;
-print "1..25\n";
+print "1..26\n";
my $test = 0;
# Historically constant folding was performed by evaluating the ops, and if
# in case we are in t/
print "not " unless stat(1 ? TEST : 0) eq stat("TEST");
print "ok ", ++$test, " - stat(const ? word : ....)\n";
+
+# or truncate
+my $n = "for_fold_dot_t$$";
+open F, ">$n" or die "open: $!";
+print F "bralh blah blah \n";
+close F or die "close $!";
+eval "truncate 1 ? $n : 0, 0;";
+print "not " unless -z $n;
+print "ok ", ++$test, " - truncate(const ? word : ...)\n";
+unlink $n;