Re: using warn instead or print STDERR?

I like to use warn instead of print STDERR if only to someday take advantage of $SIG{__WARN__}:

require Carp;
$SIG{__WARN__} = sub { Carp::cluck(@_) };

# for use with debugger
$SIG{__WARN__} = sub { $DB::single = 1 };
[download]

Comment on Re: using warn instead or print STDERR? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: using warn instead or print STDERR? by ryanc (Monk) on Feb 27, 2009 at 00:38 UTC
if only to someday take advantage of $SIG{__WARN__}: I'm curious about this now since more than one person has brought this up. By the above statement do you mean: 1) You wish to one day write code to take advantage of signal capturing, or 2) You are waiting on something to be implemented? TIA.	[reply]
Re^3: using warn instead or print STDERR? by repellent (Priest) on Feb 27, 2009 at 04:28 UTC
More like 1. `$SIG{__WARN__}` allows me to decide what to do with my warnings at some later time, without needing to substitute every `warn()` call if I need things differently. See %SIG. `# debugger, please slow down when you see keyword $SIG{__WARN__} = sub { $DB::single = $_[0] =~ /keyword/; warn(@_) }` [download]	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: using warn instead or print STDERR? by ryanc (Monk) on Feb 27, 2009 at 05:12 UTC
Very good. I took your use of the word 'someday' a bit too literally, instead of what you meant: sometime later in the running of your code. cheers. ryanc	[reply]
Re^2: using warn instead or print STDERR? by Nomad (Pilgrim) on Feb 27, 2009 at 18:20 UTC
Bit verbose perhaps? :) What about: `$SIG{__WARN__} = \&Carp::cluck;`	[reply] [d/l]