Hmm, I'm going to play devil's advocaat here (just for fun, you understand, and given the issue that warnings are not being captured in any helpful way)
First, with regard to strict, let's assume that you have a good development environment, where code is never altered directly in production, then the use of strict in the production environment is redundent - a script doesn't suddenly fail strict just because of input (well, not unless you're doing something very silly). If it passes strict in development, it will pass strict in production (which begs the question, why do your coworkers want it removed).
Warnings are more problematic, but, almost invariably, the only warning code of a useable quality ever generates is of the undeclared variable variety - and in almost all cases this will be caught in whatever handling you have for false - in other words, the warning is redundant and the issue handled correctly.
This is not my opinion, humble or otherwise, but it is perhaps a suggestion that the issue is not as critical as all that...
In reply to Re: Warnings and Strict in Production/Performance
by Melly
in thread Warnings and Strict in Production/Performance
by deep submerge
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |