To: Subject: PeekPoke Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 07:52:29 -0800 Running XP Home Edition on a P4, this doesn't work. What's wrong? Thanks. use PeekPoke qw(peek poke); my $Address; for($Address = 0; $Address < 10; $Address++) { my $Val = peek($Address); print "$Address => $Val\n"; } Subject: Re: PeekPoke Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 14:30:56 -0500 From: Mark Jason Dominus > Running XP Home Edition on a P4, this doesn't work. > What's wrong? I don't know. What did it do that you didn't like? To: "'Mark Jason Dominus'" Subject: RE: PeekPoke Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 15:03:12 -0800 Current test code is: use PeekPoke qw(peek poke); my $Val = peek(1); print " => $Val\n"; print "All Done\n"; Result is this: Perl Command Line Interpreter Perl Command Line Interpreter has encountered a problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the inconvenience. Blah blah ... Please tell Microsoft about this problem. Blah blah ... Entering the debugger gives: Unhandled exception in perl.exe (PEEKPOKE.DLL): 0xC0000005: Access Violation. Excerpt from assembly: 003310C1 call 00331534 003310C6 mov eax,dword ptr [eax] 003310C8 pop ecx 003310C9 test byte ptr [eax+15h],20h 003310CD je 003310F3 003310CF call 00331558 003310D4 push eax 003310D5 call 00331534 003310DA mov eax,dword ptr [eax] 003310DC mov edi,dword ptr [eax+0Ch] 003310DF call 00331558 003310E4 push eax 003310E5 call 0033152E 003310EA mov eax,dword ptr [eax] 003310EC pop ecx 003310ED pop ecx 003310EE mov edi,dword ptr [eax+edi*4] 003310F1 jmp 00331101 003310F3 call 00331558 003310F8 push eax 003310F9 call 00331528 003310FE pop ecx 003310FF mov edi,eax 00331101 mov ebp,dword ptr [ebx] <<<<============ error at this point 00331103 call 00331558 00331108 push eax 00331109 call 00331546 0033110E mov eax,dword ptr [eax] 00331110 pop ecx 00331111 push ebp Subject: Re: PeekPoke Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2005 21:47:53 -0500 From: Mark Jason Dominus > Perl Command Line Interpreter has encountered a > problem and needs to close. We are sorry for the > inconvenience. That's what I would expect that program to do. It looks to me as though both the program and that module are working properly.