On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Mike Blackwell <mike.blackw...@rrd.com> wrote: > I didn't see a .perlcriticrc file in the project, so ran with our local > settings. > > With those, perlcritic is pretty unhappy, even at -4, though I don't see > anything that pops out as potentially bug-inducing. The ones I'd probably > look fixing at for starters would be the two argument form of open, and > maybe the .pl files without a #! so perlcritic doesn't mistake them for .pm > files. > > It's also pretty noisy about the possible confusion cause by using a leading > zero for octal vs oct(), though that's been common practice as far back as > my memory goes. Those could be silenced in an rc file if that's preferred. > > If there's interest I could put together a patch for some or all of this. >
(Please don't top-post, it violates our mailcritic policy) There's been discussion about it before. The consensus was that we don't care about a good many of the things perlcritic consider to be very severe, e.g. two-argument open, which is an old and widely used idiom that I at least have never had any problems with. Also, I was more than amused yesterday when looking at it against the buildfarm client code when I got this: Fatal error while critiquing "./run_build.pl": Not an ARRAY reference at /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/Perl/Critic/Policy/BuiltinFunctions/ProhibitUselessTopic.pm line 81. Oh, the irony. cheers andrew -- Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services