* Stefano Lattarini wrote on Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 01:38:47PM CET: > And below is the dif for the sanity check I'd like to squash in. > > OK?
Yep, with nits addressed. Thanks! Ralf > @@ -345,14 +352,25 @@ sub _process_option_list (\%@) > return 0; > } > > +# Note the sanity checks: these function should be called at most once for > +# each set of options having the same precedence; otherwise, we couldn't > +# guarantee that explicitly-specified warning levels take precedence > +# over strictness-implied ones. This comment is either superfluous or belongs with _process_option_list. I'd just omit it: the comment before _process_option_list documents it. (I'm harping on this so pedantically because you should either have one proper comment before each function in general; merging the comments for the three functions involved here and thus having them only before _process_option_list is OK, but then it should be kept that way; having half the comments merged and the other half not is a recipe for future confusion.) > sub process_option_list (@) > { > + prog_error "local options already processed" > + if ($_options_processed); No need for parentheses in trailing if. > return _process_option_list (%_options, @_); > + $_options_processed = 1; > } > > sub process_global_option_list (@) > { > + prog_error "global options already processed" > + if ($_global_options_processed); Likewise. > return _process_option_list (%_global_options, @_); > + $_global_options_processed = 1; > } > > =item C<set_strictness ($name)>