in reply to -w considered harmful

Harmful perhaps, but personally _always_ run my code with 'warnings' on. I've more recently, considered using 'strict' to be the way to go too.
My reasoning is quite simple. It forces me to right 'good' code and not just rely on perl to let me be lazy.
It has also, on occasion, showed me place where I was doing very silly things.
Chasing a warning that makes no sense can be irritating, but then again, so can chasing a bug which makes even less sense....
(My personal favourite was creating a pointer, instead of an array in C. The code would run fine for the first iteration, however, subsequent iterations would _always_ crash. It took me ages to spot why...)
--
It's not pessimism if there is a worse option, it's not paranoia when they are and it's not cynicism when you're right.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: -w considered harmful
by demerphq (Chancellor) on Sep 04, 2002 at 09:20 UTC
    Note that I was saying "-w" is harmful, not "use warnings;"

    Every script I write starts out 

    use strict;
use warnings;

    [download]

    Yves / DeMerphq
    ---
    Software Engineering is Programming when you can't. -- E. W. Dijkstra (RIP)

[reply]
[d/l]
      In which case, I stand corrected. (And FWIW I agree).
      --
      It's not pessimism if there is a worse option, it's not paranoia when they are and it's not cynicism when you're right.
[reply]

In Section Meditations