Re: perl checking

2018-05-28 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 11:42 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > > > On 05/18/2018 02:02 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: >> >> >> These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our perl >> code. >> >> >> One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unportability of >> the literal

Re: perl checking

2018-05-27 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/18/2018 02:02 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote: These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our perl code. One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unportability of the literal 0x1. We've run for many years without this giving us a problem, so

Re: perl checking

2018-05-22 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Tue, 22 May 2018 15:02:46 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote in > > - elsif ($in < 0x1) > > + elsif ($in <= 0x) This is one of my thougts and the reason for regarding it sour is the following. > > For consistency, the other arms of the "if" should be adjusted > > similarly. >

Re: perl checking

2018-05-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/22/2018 10:09 AM, Tom Lane wrote: Andrew Dunstan writes: On 05/22/2018 04:11 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: At Fri, 18 May 2018 14:02:39 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote in <5a6d6de8-cff8-1ffb-946c-ccf381800...@2ndquadrant.com> One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unpor

Re: perl checking

2018-05-22 Thread Tom Lane
Andrew Dunstan writes: > On 05/22/2018 04:11 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: >> At Fri, 18 May 2018 14:02:39 -0400, Andrew Dunstan >> wrote in >> <5a6d6de8-cff8-1ffb-946c-ccf381800...@2ndquadrant.com> >>> One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unportability >>> of the literal 0x1

Re: perl checking

2018-05-22 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/22/2018 04:11 AM, Kyotaro HORIGUCHI wrote: At Fri, 18 May 2018 14:02:39 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote in <5a6d6de8-cff8-1ffb-946c-ccf381800...@2ndquadrant.com> These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our perl code. One patch silences a warning from convutils.p

Re: perl checking

2018-05-22 Thread Kyotaro HORIGUCHI
At Fri, 18 May 2018 14:02:39 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote in <5a6d6de8-cff8-1ffb-946c-ccf381800...@2ndquadrant.com> > > These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our > perl code. > > > One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unportability > of the liter

Re: perl checking

2018-05-18 Thread Andrew Dunstan
On 05/18/2018 09:05 PM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: On 5/18/18 14:02, Andrew Dunstan wrote: These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our perl code. It's not clear to me what that really means. My understanding is that perl "warnings" are primarily a run-time instrument,

Re: perl checking

2018-05-18 Thread Peter Eisentraut
On 5/18/18 14:02, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our > perl code. It's not clear to me what that really means. My understanding is that perl "warnings" are primarily a run-time instrument, unlike 'use strict' and perl -c. I have been pl

perl checking

2018-05-18 Thread Andrew Dunstan
These two small patches allow us to run "perl -cw" cleanly on all our perl code. One patch silences a warning from convutils.pl about the unportability of the literal 0x1. We've run for many years without this giving us a problem, so I think we can turn the warning off pretty safely