On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Richard Clamp wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 05:04:10PM +0100, Shevek wrote:
> > On 31 Mar 2003, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > > Wrong. I can't get this to shuttup in Perl 5.5:
> > >
> > > my @punctuation = qw(. , ! ?);
> >
> > I would argue for:
> >
> > my @punct = do
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 05:04:10PM +0100, Shevek wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2003, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > Wrong. I can't get this to shuttup in Perl 5.5:
> >
> > my @punctuation = qw(. , ! ?);
>
> I would argue for:
>
> my @punct = do { no warnings; qw(. , ! ?); };
But you're missing the stipu
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Simon Wistow wrote:
> It p*sses me off when I see C projects spewing out warnings during
> compile. Why? Because they'll never get fixed. Not without some
> gargantuan effort which could have been avoided by doing it before check
> in.
The compile ones aren't so hard to fi
Shevek wrote:
>>[Randal Schwartz's opinion]
Hence my conclusions are "warnings are interesting, but not the end
all". Notice when they happen for development. Turn them off for
production.
This implies that you get very high coverage testing in development to
make the warnings totally unnecessa
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 07:46:34AM -0800, Randal L. Schwartz said:
> Do you really insist that at a direct lack of clarity, I rewrite this as:
>
> my @punctuation = (".", ",", "!", "?");
>
> That's annoying.
Actually, I think it makes sense. And, even if it does make it less
clear then you st
On 31 Mar 2003, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> > "Shevek" == Shevek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Shevek> You should never ignore warnings. The code should be coded so
> Shevek> as not to issue them.
>
> Wrong. I can't get this to shuttup in Perl 5.5:
>
> my @punctuation = qw(. , ! ?);
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Randal L. Schwartz)
Date: 3/31/03 3:46:34 PM
> "Shevek" == Shevek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> You should never ignore warnings. The code should
>> be coded so as not to issue them.
>
> Wrong. I can't get this to shuttup in Perl 5.5:
>
> my @punctuation = qw(
> "Shevek" == Shevek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Shevek> You should never ignore warnings. The code should be coded so
Shevek> as not to issue them.
Wrong. I can't get this to shuttup in Perl 5.5:
my @punctuation = qw(. , ! ?);
Because it complains about the comma, which while frequentl
Title: RE: use warnings and 5.005
>Shevek:
>>Philip:
>> >Pete:
>> >>Shevek:
>> >> Warnings are things that tell you when you did something you
>> >> shouldn't.
>>
>> >No, that's wrong, and apparently the cent
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 01:14:29PM +0100, Peter Sergeant wrote:
> > Warnings are things that tell you when you did something you
> > shouldn't.
>
> No, that's wrong, and apparently the central point of your
> misconception. Warnings are things that tell you when you *might* have
> done something
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, HellyerP wrote:
> >> Warnings are things that tell you when you did something you
> >> shouldn't.
>
> >No, that's wrong, and apparently the central point of your
> >misconception. Warnings are things that tell you when you *might* have
> >done something wrong. That's why th
Title: RE: use warnings and 5.005
>> Warnings are things that tell you when you did something you
>> shouldn't.
>No, that's wrong, and apparently the central point of your
>misconception. Warnings are things that tell you when you *might* have
>done some
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Peter Sergeant wrote:
> > Warnings are things that tell you when you did something you
> > shouldn't.
>
> No, that's wrong, and apparently the central point of your
> misconception. Warnings are things that tell you when you *might* have
> done something wrong. That's why t
> Warnings are things that tell you when you did something you
> shouldn't.
No, that's wrong, and apparently the central point of your
misconception. Warnings are things that tell you when you *might* have
done something wrong. That's why they're called 'warnings' and not
'errors'.
+Pete
--
R
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Peter Sergeant wrote:
> > If your code issues
> > warnings, it's wrong.
>
> It is? Warnings are just that: warnings. Information to make you sit up
> and say 'is that what I meant to do'? If your code doesn't compile, it's
> probably wrong, whether or not it issues warnings
> If your code issues
> warnings, it's wrong.
It is? Warnings are just that: warnings. Information to make you sit up
and say 'is that what I meant to do'? If your code doesn't compile, it's
probably wrong, whether or not it issues warnings is irrelevant.
+Pete
--
When a man is tired of London
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Steve Keay wrote:
> Why do people "use warnings" in a module? Why not allow the user of
> your module to decide whether or not they want to be warned?
Sometimes (e.g. when deliberately using symbolic refs), it is
inappropriate to use ref warnings. At other times, if your co
Why do people "use warnings" in a module? Why not allow the user of
your module to decide whether or not they want to be warned?
On Sun, Mar 30, 2003 at 11:53:22AM +0100, Struan Donald said:
> Harking back to Simon's[0] complaint of modules being non 5.005
> compatible simply due to turning on the warnings pragma is there a way
> to turn it on for 5.6+?
>
> Some poking turns up this mail on p5p from Nick Clark:
>
> http://
> "Struan" == Struan Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Struan> So, is just missing out the line the way forward or is there an
Struan> approved idiom that escapes my google foo?
Put -w on the command line. Works all the way back to Perl 2.000
:-)
--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consul
Harking back to Simon's[0] complaint of modules being non 5.005
compatible simply due to turning on the warnings pragma is there a way
to turn it on for 5.6+?
Some poking turns up this mail on p5p from Nick Clark:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?H28912404
which asks if
if ($] >= 5.006) {
21 matches
Mail list logo
