in reply to Re^10: Perl 5.12.0 has been released! (exetype problem 64-bit)
in thread Perl 5.12.0 has been released!

Given that the perl community (in general) frowns so heavily upon warnings being emitted at *any* stage, it's rather surprising that this sort of thing is tolerated.
I never got the impression p5p is really concerned about bending code backwards just to avoid warnings. They are *warnings* after all. And there are (C) compilers that are picky. Very, very picky (they are C compilers, so they can spend time on nitpicking). Combine that with the fact the perl sources need to compile on a wide range of compilers, compiler versions, platforms and OSses, and it contains code that has been written eons ago. I'd very surprised if there are many compiler/OS/platform combinations that doesn't emit a single warning during the perl build process.
  • Comment on Re^11: Perl 5.12.0 has been released! (exetype problem 64-bit)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^12: Perl 5.12.0 has been released! (exetype problem 64-bit)
by syphilis (Archbishop) on Apr 16, 2010 at 11:20 UTC
    I'd very surprised if there are many compiler/OS/platform combinations that doesn't emit a single warning during the perl build process

    Yes, I get 3 compiler warnings on linux. However, I would think that if *nix builds generated as many warnings as the x64 windows build, p5p would do something about it quicksmart.

    Personally, I'm not greatly perturbed - the main problem on x64 windows is that, because there's so many warnings, your chances of spotting the odd one out that *does* have a bearing on a problem is greatly reduced.

    Cheers,
    Rob
[reply]
      However, I would think that if *nix builds generated as many warnings as the x64 windows build, p5p would do something about it quicksmart.
      True, but that's something else than
      Given that the perl community (in general) frowns so heavily upon warnings being emitted at *any* stage, it's rather surprising that this sort of thing is tolerated.
      Personally, I'm not greatly perturbed - the main problem on x64 windows is that, because there's so many warnings, your chances of spotting the odd one out that *does* have a bearing on a problem is greatly reduced.
      Yes. To bad that six release candidates (RC0 - RC5) were made available over a period of several weeks, and noone spoke up about this issue then. One of the reasons Perl .0 releases have a bad reputation is that release candidates are commonly ignored - and problems are only spotted afterwards.
[reply]
        To bad that six release candidates (RC0 - RC5) were made available over a period of several weeks, and noone spoke up about this issue then

        The issue has been around for a couple of years - well before the 5.12 release candidates arived on the scene. Not exactly sure just why noone has done anything about it ... maybe it's something that's very tedious to fix and people are afraid to complain vigorously lest they be given the job of applying the fixes.

        Cheers,
        Rob
[reply]

In Section Perl News