Re: [PATCH 2/2] Use 'env' to find perl instead of fixed path

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Eric Wong <e@80x24.org> writes:
>> > Pat Pannuto <pat.pannuto@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> You may still want the 1/2 patch in this series, just to make things
>> >> internally consistent with "-w" vs "use warnings;" inside git's perl
>> >> scripts.
>> >
>> > No, that is a step back.  "-w" affects the entire process, so it
>> > spots more potential problems.  The "warnings" pragma is scoped
>> > to the enclosing block, so it won't span across files.
>> 
>> OK, so with "-w", we do not have to write "use warnings" in each of
>> our files to get them checked.  It is handy when we ship our own
>> libs (e.g. Git.pm) that are used by our programs.
>
> Yes.  "use warnings" should be in our own libs in case other
> people run without "-w"

> Yes, "-w" will trigger warnings in third party packages.
> Existing uses we have should be fine, and I think most Perl
> modules we use or would use are vigilant about being
> warnings-clean.  If we have to leave off a "-w", there should
> probably be a comment at the top stating the reason:
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> # Not using "perl -w" since Foo::Bar <= X.Y.Y is not warnings-clean
> use strict;
> use warnings;
> use Foo::Bar;
> ...