On Thu, Sep 21, 2000 at 10:59:19AM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> For lexicals, a use without a declaration makes no sense, because
> variables default to global (non-lexical). A use without an
> initialization is of arguable utility, because your defined() tests may
> already be intended to check fo
Michael Fowler wrote:
>
> Ok, at this point I'm trying to clear up misunderstandings. I believe you
> know where I stand with relation to your RFC.
Thanks, you caught several of my mistakes.
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 06:41:52PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> > Michael Fowler wrote:
>
> > > Exc
Eric Roode wrote:
>
> Steve Fink, via the Perl6 Librarian, wrote:
> >=head2 EXAMPLE
> >
> >1 my ($x, $y, $z, $r);
> >2 $z = 1;
> >3 f(\$r);
> >4 my $logfile = "/tmp/log";
> >5 $x = 1 if cond();
> >6 print $x+$y;
> >7 undef $z;
> >8 print $z;
> >
> [...]
> >No warni
Steve Fink, via the Perl6 Librarian, wrote:
>=head2 EXAMPLE
>
>1 my ($x, $y, $z, $r);
>2 $z = 1;
>3 f(\$r);
>4 my $logfile = "/tmp/log";
>5 $x = 1 if cond();
>6 print $x+$y;
>7 undef $z;
>8 print $z;
>
[...]
>No warning is issued for C<$r> because any variable whose
Ok, at this point I'm trying to clear up misunderstandings. I believe you
know where I stand with relation to your RFC.
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 06:41:52PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> Michael Fowler wrote:
> > Except for the line number reported, which is the important part.
>
> Oh. Certainly yo
Tom Christiansen wrote:
>
> >Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >>
> >> >It happens when I don't bother to declare something. My company has
> >> >several dozen machines with an 'our'-less perl, and 'use vars qw($x)' is
> >> >a pain. As is $My::Package::Name::x.
> >>
> >> Far, far easier to fix behavioral
>Tom Christiansen wrote:
>>
>> >It happens when I don't bother to declare something. My company has
>> >several dozen machines with an 'our'-less perl, and 'use vars qw($x)' is
>> >a pain. As is $My::Package::Name::x.
>>
>> Far, far easier to fix behavioral problems than to hack Perl.
>>
>> --t
Michael Fowler wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 05:20:54PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> > > $foobal = 3;
> > > if (@ARGV) {
> > > $foobar = @ARGV;
> > > }
> > >
> > > print $foobar;
> > >
> > > Only warn me that $foobar is uninitialized? I always prefer it when the
> > >
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 05:20:54PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> > $foobal = 3;
> > if (@ARGV) {
> > $foobar = @ARGV;
> > }
> >
> > print $foobar;
> >
> > Only warn me that $foobar is uninitialized? I always prefer it when the
> > actual source of my problem is pointed out,
Tom Christiansen wrote:
>
> >It happens when I don't bother to declare something. My company has
> >several dozen machines with an 'our'-less perl, and 'use vars qw($x)' is
> >a pain. As is $My::Package::Name::x.
>
> Far, far easier to fix behavioral problems than to hack Perl.
>
> --tom
Not s
Michael Fowler wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 03:25:11PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> > > > complains, but
> > > >
> > > > $x = 3; $x = 3
> > >
> > > As it shouldn't; you've mentioned $x twice, which means you probably didn't
> > > misspell it. That your mentioning twice in this manner is sil
>It happens when I don't bother to declare something. My company has
>several dozen machines with an 'our'-less perl, and 'use vars qw($x)' is
>a pain. As is $My::Package::Name::x.
Far, far easier to fix behavioral problems than to hack Perl.
--tom
> >Which is silly, because you shouldn't have to say '$x = $x = 3' when you
> >mean '$x = 3'. Just because there's a real reason behind it doesn't make it
> >any less silly.
>
> I'd like to see where this can happen. Sounds like someone forgot to
> declare something:
>
> our $x;
> $x =
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 05:10:55PM -0600, Tom Christiansen wrote:
> >Which is silly, because you shouldn't have to say '$x = $x = 3' when you
> >mean '$x = 3'. Just because there's a real reason behind it doesn't make it
> >any less silly.
>
> I'd like to see where this can happen. Sounds like
>Which is silly, because you shouldn't have to say '$x = $x = 3' when you
>mean '$x = 3'. Just because there's a real reason behind it doesn't make it
>any less silly.
I'd like to see where this can happen. Sounds like someone forgot to
declare something:
our $x;
$x = 2;
--tom
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 03:25:11PM -0700, Steve Fink wrote:
> > > complains, but
> > >
> > > $x = 3; $x = 3
> >
> > As it shouldn't; you've mentioned $x twice, which means you probably didn't
> > misspell it. That your mentioning twice in this manner is silly is beyond
> > perl's grasp.
>
> Ac
Michael Fowler wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 07:45:16PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> > "VARIABLE used only once: possible typo" should be replaced with
> > warnings on uses of uninitialized variables (including lexicals).
>
> > $x = 3
>
> I don't understand, who's to say you didn't
On Wed, Sep 20, 2000 at 07:45:16PM -, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote:
> "VARIABLE used only once: possible typo" should be replaced with
> warnings on uses of uninitialized variables (including lexicals).
> $x = 3
I don't understand, who's to say you didn't misspell $x? If you're only
using it
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
variable usage warnings
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Steve Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 2 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 20 Sep 2000
Mailing List: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Number: 12
Version: 3
Status: Deve
19 matches
Mail list logo
