Re: complaint: always testing defined()

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: complaint: always testing defined() by Joost (Canon) on Nov 03, 2007 at 11:14 UTC
Your code doesn't do the same thing the OP does: he wants the test to FAIL when the parameter is undefined. "What should it profit a man, if he should win a flame war, yet lose his cool?"	[reply]
Re^3: complaint: always testing defined() by parv (Parson) on Nov 03, 2007 at 12:02 UTC
OP is checking for defined-ness solely to avoid generation of the warning (if the variable being checked against the empty string happens to be undefined). To me, that is whole reason for existence of this thread (from OP)... I find myself doing: `if (defined($params->{root}) && $params->{root} eq '')` [download] to avoid a runtime warning.	[reply] [d/l]
Re^4: complaint: always testing defined() by ysth (Canon) on Nov 04, 2007 at 03:29 UTC
OP is checking for defined-ness solely to avoid generation of the warning Can I get the name of your crystal ball supplier? I would guess that the warning made the OP stop and think what branch to take in the undef case, and that the OP's code has a good chance of reflecting what was actually wanted.	[reply]
Re^5: complaint: always testing defined() by parv (Parson) on Nov 04, 2007 at 13:04 UTC
Re^6: complaint: always testing defined() by ysth (Canon) on Nov 05, 2007 at 03:36 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here
Re^4: complaint: always testing defined() by syphilis (Archbishop) on Nov 03, 2007 at 12:10 UTC
Has `no warnings 'uninitialized';` been mentioned yet ? Update: Ooops .. yes, it has. (Sorry, missed it.) Cheers, Rob	[reply] [d/l]