in reply to Get stricter with use warnings FATAL => 'all';

Please enlighten me if I have overlooked something. I see no downside; do you?
Car maker: instead of allowing people to continue driving when we are now showing an orange light, let's shut down the engine, and require the car to come in to the shop before it can be restarted again. I see no downside; do you?
  • Comment on Re: Get stricter with use warnings FATAL => 'all';

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Get stricter with use warnings FATAL => 'all';
by FloydATC (Deacon) on Oct 17, 2011 at 10:59 UTC
    Are you suggesting scripts are subject to wear and tear so they need to be serviced every 100000 code lines executed or something? :-)

    "You've got a cracked file globber seal causing memory leak. Also, when was the last time you replaced the punctuation?"

    -- Time flies when you don't know what you're doing
[reply]
      Are you suggesting scripts are subject to wear and tear so they need to be serviced every 100000 code lines executed or something?
      Unfortunately, it is like that. The script itself does not wear, but the environment changes: you upgrade the OS, replace hardware, and change your mind. Maintaining a large program can be as hard as developing it.
[reply]
      So, everything is static? Why even bother with warnings? Run a linter just once, instead of checking for warning on each run of your program!
[reply]

In Section Meditations