develooper Front page | perl.perl5.porters | Postings from September 2014

=?UTF-8?B?W3BlcmwgIzEyMjY5MF0g4oCYQmFyZXdvcmQgIiVzIiByZWZlcnMgdG8gbm9u?= =?UTF-8?B?ZXhpc3RlbnQgcGFja2FnZeKAmSBzaG91bGQgZ28=?=

Thread Next
From:
Father Chrysostomos via RT
Date:
September 22, 2014 23:48
Subject:
=?UTF-8?B?W3BlcmwgIzEyMjY5MF0g4oCYQmFyZXdvcmQgIiVzIiByZWZlcnMgdG8gbm9u?= =?UTF-8?B?ZXhpc3RlbnQgcGFja2FnZeKAmSBzaG91bGQgZ28=?=
Message ID:
rt-4.0.18-22889-1411429725-335.122690-15-0@perl.org
On Mon Sep 22 15:51:28 2014, jkeenan wrote:
> On Tue Sep 02 23:00:22 2014, sprout wrote:
> > ‘Bareword "%s" refers to nonexistent package’
> > 
> > This warning occurs when you do Foo::->bar and Foo is defined later on
> > in the file.  This warning discourages good practice in favour of a
> > more ambiguous syntax (Foo->bar, which could mean Foo()->bar).  Hence,
> > I think it should be deleted.
> 
> 1. Does anyone want to second this motion?
> 
> 2. Can anyone identify reasons why we should not delete this warning?

There was a strong objection immediately after I posted this, namely, that this warning catches typos and you can’t use a class before it’s loaded anyway.  The ticket didn’t pick up the messages, probably because the subject line has extra-Latin-1 characters in it and, when MIME-encoded, doesn’t contain ‘[perl #...]’.

I personally do not find the objections convincing, but I am not interested in arguing about it, so I’m rejecting this ticket.

-- 

Father Chrysostomos


---
via perlbug:  queue: perl5 status: open
https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=122690

Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About