Match standard Perl POD item validation in Protocol::IRC
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Newbie friendliness
- 52/100
Research direction
Start with the failing t/99pod.t checks and compare the reported Protocol-IRC source lines with standard Perl's Test::Pod behavior. Trace whether the mismatch is in the bundled Test::Pod implementation, POD parsing, or PerlOnJava semantics, then add a focused regression and verify both JVM and interpreter backends plus the unchanged Protocol-IRC 0.13 suite.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
Summary
PerlOnJava does not reproduce standard Perl behavior for the POD validation in Protocol-IRC 0.13. The unchanged upstream suite passes under system Perl but fails under PerlOnJava because valid numbered POD items are rejected.
CPAN evidence
CPAN random tester run 20260915-094334-6702:
- Distribution:
Protocol-IRC0.13 - System Perl: 17 test files and 269 tests pass
- PerlOnJava: 2 of 269 tests fail in
t/99pod.t - All 16 functional test files pass under PerlOnJava
- The failure reproduces in the PerlOnJava target run and the regression run
- Both JVM and interpreter behavior should be verified during implementation
The failing diagnostics are:
blib/lib/Protocol/IRC.pm (56): You have '=item 2' instead of the expected '=item 1'
blib/lib/Protocol/IRC.pm (97): You have '=item 2' instead of the expected '=item 1'
blib/lib/Protocol/IRC.pm (103): You have '=item 3' instead of the expected '=item 1'
blib/lib/Protocol/IRC.pm (635): You have '=item 2' instead of the expected '=item 1'
blib/lib/Protocol/IRC.pm (641): You have '=item 3' instead of the expected '=item 1'
The same POD passes the standard Perl Test::Pod check.
Expected behavior
PerlOnJava should accept the same valid POD item numbering accepted by standard Perl and allow t/99pod.t to pass without changing the upstream distribution.
Investigation scope
Determine whether the mismatch is in the bundled Test::Pod implementation, POD parsing, or PerlOnJava semantics exposed to the POD checker. Compare the exact source and parser state at each reported =item and test both execution backends.
Add a focused project-owned regression that is validated with system Perl first, then passes on both PerlOnJava backends. Re-run the complete unchanged Protocol-IRC 0.13 suite after the fix.
This is a pure-Perl compatibility defect, not a timeout, native dependency, service, or platform prerequisite issue.
Related but distinct: #1357 concerns valid POD directives after executable code being parsed as Perl source.
- Dominant language
- Perl
- Stars
- 64
- Forks
- 6
- Avg merge
- 5h 18m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 162
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from fglock/PerlOnJava
-
area:cpan-port area:unicode bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
fglock/PerlOnJava#1341 ·
-
area:backend area:cpan-port area:parser area:runtime bug
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 52/100
fglock/PerlOnJava#1477 ·
-
area:cpan-port area:parser area:unicode bug
Difficulty 3/5 1-2 days Newbie friendliness 67/100
fglock/PerlOnJava#1476 ·
-
area:backend area:cpan-port area:runtime bug
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 55/100
fglock/PerlOnJava#1475 ·
-
area:parser area:warnings bug
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 48/100
fglock/PerlOnJava#1473 ·
All issues in fglock/PerlOnJava
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
corazawaf/coraza-nginx#140 ·
-
1.severity: security
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 82/100
api7/lua-resty-saml#63 ·
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 68/100
-
Difficulty 1/5 Under an hour Newbie friendliness 82/100