| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: perl checking |
| Date: | 2018-05-19 01:05:41 |
| Message-ID: | 5ad08e4b-d9aa-3739-7b99-116d8e364a36@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 5/18/18 14:02, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our
> perl code.
It's not clear to me what that really means. My understanding is that
perl "warnings" are primarily a run-time instrument, unlike 'use strict'
and perl -c. I have been playing with a private branch that adds 'use
warnings' next to 'use strict' across the perl scripts, and there are a
number of warnings that pop up at run time. The fact that you get even
more warnings at compile time makes me wonder.
--
Peter Eisentraut http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Justin Pryzby | 2018-05-19 01:56:53 | Re: Should we add GUCs to allow partition pruning to be disabled? |
| Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2018-05-19 01:01:21 | Re: Postgres, fsync, and OSs (specifically linux) |