Matt Sergeant wrote: > On 25 May 2005, at 11:28, John Peacock wrote: > >> Matt Sergeant wrote: >> >>> We currently don't "use strict" for plugins. Anyone object to me >>> making it so? >> >> >> Did you just add it to the wrapper code to see whether it would break >> anything (at least for the most common plugins)? I just did that and >> it caused no problems with my usual configuration... > > > Yeah, I think all the current plugins pass the strict test fine > (otherwise they wouldn't work, right?). > > I've been badly caught out by renaming variables and being non-strict it > just keeps working but my errors get passed by.
Speaking of which (sort of), it looks like the high_perf branch does not have taint turned on.. Is this for performance reasons, or is this a choice? [EMAIL PROTECTED] $ /usr/bin/perl -Tw ./qpsmtpd Insecure dependency in require while running with -T switch at ./qpsmtpd line 15. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at ./qpsmtpd line 15.
