Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from April 2000
Does this make anybody happy? (Also, it may be relevant to mention that B::Deparse gives different results for 'print " " . $a' and 'print " $a"', but I'm probably missing something. Also, exploration of this came up with another uninitialized value problem in B::Deparse, but I'm too lazy to look at it now.) --- perl-5.6.0/pod/perldiag.pod.orig Tue Apr 4 21:56:57 2000 +++ perl-5.6.0/pod/perldiag.pod Tue Apr 4 22:02:54 2000 @@ -3358,7 +3358,12 @@ (W uninitialized) An undefined value was used as if it were already defined. It was interpreted as a "" or a 0, but maybe it was a mistake. To suppress this -warning assign a defined value to your variables. +warning assign a defined value to your variables. To help you figure out what was +undefined, perl tells you what opcode you used an undefined value in. Note, however, +that perl optimizes your program and the opcode displayed by your program may not +necessarily appear literally in your program. For example, C<"that $foo"> is +usually optimized into C<"that " . $foo>, and the warning will refer to +the C<concatenation (.)> opcode, even though there is no C<.> in your program. =item Useless use of "re" pragma