Re: Fix for "undefined value" warning in Makefile.PL

2005-08-23 Thread Philip M. Gollucci
Nikolay Ananiev wrote: +" LoadModule perl_module modules/$build->{MODPERL_LIB_DSO}", + +if($build->{MP_APXS}) { +warning "", +"depending on your build, mod_perl might not live in", +"the modules/ directo

Re: -Wdeclaration-after-statement Final version

2005-08-23 Thread Philip M. Gollucci
Philip M. Gollucci wrote: Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: Ah, I did miss it... read right over it. D'oh! Here is its again with the return 0 left in as most of the code in Build.pm is return 0 though not all. Also, using Philippe's cmp_tuples function. Index: Build.pm ===

Re: -Wdeclaration-after-statement Final version

2005-08-23 Thread Philip M. Gollucci
Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: That was by design, to keep the behaviour of <=> or cmp You must have missed this bit: return cmp_tuples([EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]) == 1; Where I specifically check that @tuples is greater than @r_tuples. Figured this cmp_tuples() migth also be used to

Re: -Wdeclaration-after-statement Final version

2005-08-23 Thread Philippe M. Chiasson
Philip M. Gollucci wrote: > Philippe M. Chiasson wrote: > >> Isn't "return;" the more canonical way of returning false ? > > Beats me... I know a lot of the mp2 code particular Apache2::Status as I > was just digging in there uses return 0. I really have no preference. Just looked around the ex

Re: -Wdeclaration-after-statement Final version

2005-08-23 Thread Geoffrey Young
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>Isn't "return;" the more canonical way of returning false ? >> >>Beats me... I know a lot of the mp2 code particular Apache2::Status as I > > > was just digging in there uses return 0. I really have no preference. > > Just a note, the new "Perl Best Practices" Dam

Re: -Wdeclaration-after-statement Final version

2005-08-23 Thread Andy_Bach
> > Isn't "return;" the more canonical way of returning false ? > Beats me... I know a lot of the mp2 code particular Apache2::Status as I was just digging in there uses return 0. I really have no preference. Just a note, the new "Perl Best Practices" Damian Conway, suggest a bare return is be

Re: Fix for "undefined value" warning in Makefile.PL

2005-08-23 Thread Nikolay Ananiev
"Nikolay Ananiev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > This one fixes an "Undefined value" warning in Makefile.PL, when apxs is not > present on Win32. > >[...] Seems like the patch is malformed, so I'm attaching it here. begin 666 p.txt [EMAIL PROTECTED]($UA:V5F:6QE+E!,

Fix for "undefined value" warning in Makefile.PL

2005-08-23 Thread Nikolay Ananiev
This one fixes an "Undefined value" warning in Makefile.PL, when apxs is not present on Win32. Index: Makefile.PL === --- Makefile.PL (revision 239256) +++ Makefile.PL (working copy) @@ -391,11 +391,15 @@ if ($build->is_dynamic)