Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 50 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upDoc issues for system, exec, qx #12642
Comments
From tlhackque@yahoo.comCreated by tlhackque@yahoo.comFunctions using 'exec' (at least exec, system qx) generate warnings if 'use warnings;' is in effect. This isn't a bad thing - but the fact that the documentation for these functions doesn't mention this is. The only documented exception from these functions is 'die' on tainted input. Please update these functions to indicate that: Actually, it would be really helpful if every function that registers with 'use warnings' would include similar info in its documentation. It took rather some tracking down - and some guesswork - to solve an issue caused by this behavior. Even though I did read the manual (and the book and the perldoc and the perl website...) Thanks. Perl Info |
From @jkeenanOn Thu Dec 13 07:19:45 2012, tlhackque wrote:
My impression is that for most of the built-in functions there is no So it's not clear to me why this is somehow a bigger documentation
|
|
The RT System itself - Status changed from 'new' to 'open' |
From @doyOn Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 07:02:04PM -0800, James E Keenan via RT wrote:
These sorts of things are all documented in 'perldoc perllexwarn' and -doy |
From tlhackque@yahoo.comI think it's a problem for all built-ins; it just happened that exec As a user of functions, I expect the man/perldoc page for a function to Exception (and WARN is an exception) conditions are part of the API The functions doc in the camel book have standard anotation symbols It doesn't have to be a detailed pointer with every function. Just (as perldoc warnings doesn't tell me what I need to know. perllexwarn (hardly ovbious) has the taxonomy, and tells me to see From a user's point of view: I select a function that does what I In my case, I had code that "worked" - until someone enabled an Assert If context helps, the code attempted to run selinuxenabled to see if it Several projects that I've been involved with are leary of running with So I do think this needs to be addressed. We do want people to write On Thu Dec 13 19:07:09 2012, doy@tozt.net wrote:
|
From zefram@fysh.orgIn perldiag we already have systematic documentation of all the warnings, -zefram |
From @xsawyerxOn Tue, 12 Dec 2017 14:32:06 -0800, zefram@fysh.org wrote:
We could add a small blurb to "perlfunc" that any warnings produced by keywords are described in "warnings.pm". Otherwise, let's not duplicate documentation, only point to the right ones. |
From @mfontani
The patch attached should do this, hopefully using minimal language. $ ./perl t/porting/podcheck.t | grep perlfunc The POD looks all right with this change, according to the test. HTH, |
From @mfontani0001-mention-perldoc-warnings-in-perlfunc.patchFrom ad327d1510783d7fddb102531dad153ea51d2bd4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Marco Fontani <MFONTANI@cpan.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:11:44 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] mention "perldoc warnings" in perlfunc
RT # 116080
Rather than duplicating information as to which keyword, function, or
operator generates which warning, point the reader to the proper place
to read about which warnings Perl generates in which scenario, which are
well described in the POD for "warnings".
---
pod/perlfunc.pod | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git pod/perlfunc.pod pod/perlfunc.pod
index 18a52113be..41a5c8e35b 100644
--- pod/perlfunc.pod
+++ pod/perlfunc.pod
@@ -104,7 +104,8 @@ X<function>
Here are Perl's functions (including things that look like
functions, like some keywords and named operators)
arranged by category. Some functions appear in more
-than one place.
+than one place. Any warnings, including those produced by
+keywords, are described in C<perldoc warnings>.
=over 4
--
2.15.1
|
From zefram@fysh.orgMarco Fontani via RT wrote:
Applied with edit as commit e135ff6. -zefram |
|
@iabyn - Status changed from 'open' to 'resolved' |
From @mfontaniOn Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Zefram <zefram@fysh.org> wrote:
The edit looks to have added a stray "plus sign" at the start of the line. Attached patch to correct that. -- |
From @mfontani0001-perlfunc-remove-stray-plus-from-start-of-line.patchFrom 08131fc9b2e119850578529dfe1ea857bb31a083 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Marco Fontani <MFONTANI@cpan.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 13:17:48 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] perlfunc: remove stray plus from start of line
Looks to be an artifact of applying my original patch, which was amended
as part of e135ff695231a81e2a70a739e8d813525432fd4d, whereby the text
was slightly amended.
---
pod/perlfunc.pod | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git pod/perlfunc.pod pod/perlfunc.pod
index 78773e944b..3fcd437085 100644
--- pod/perlfunc.pod
+++ pod/perlfunc.pod
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ Here are Perl's functions (including things that look like
functions, like some keywords and named operators)
arranged by category. Some functions appear in more
than one place. Any warnings, including those produced by
-+keywords, are described in L<perldiag> and L<warnings>.
+keywords, are described in L<perldiag> and L<warnings>.
=over 4
--
2.15.1
|
From @khwilliamsonOn 12/15/2017 05:22 AM, Marco Fontani wrote:
Sorry, and thanks. Applied as |
Migrated from rt.perl.org#116080 (status was 'resolved')
Searchable as RT116080$