in reply to Re: Re: "use strict" not too strict
in thread "use strict" not too strict

It is probably more fruitful to use the compiler backends (the B::* modules) than rely on the symbol table, or at least the symbol table alone.

Makeshifts last the longest.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re^3: "use strict" not too strict
by Mur (Pilgrim) on Jul 17, 2003 at 20:56 UTC
    I came across B::Lint, but it won't catch things like -- 
    use strict;
my $a = foo() if 0;

    [download]
    in that it still *runs* the code in question, and only flags undefined routines if they are actually *called*. Oh, well.
    --
    Jeff Boes
    Database Engineer
    Nexcerpt, Inc.
    vox 269.226.9550 ext 24
    fax 269.349.9076
     http://www.nexcerpt.com
    ...Nexcerpt...Connecting People With Expertise
[reply]
[d/l]
[select]
      I was more talking about ::Xref and ::Terse/::Concise to inspect what symbols are actually used to look up subroutines through.

      Makeshifts last the longest.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom