Seems (to my unfamiliar-with-internals eyes) like it wouldn't be too much of a stretch to have a check option for each phase, so you could syntax-check only the BEGIN phase, for example. I don't even know in what order BEGIN, CHECK, and INIT get run, but each setting would only run "up to" whatever phase you're interested in.
Would someone who has a better understanding comment on whether that's doable?
Update: Looks like people know enough to downvote, but not enough to explain. That's never happened before.
Caution: Contents may have been coded under pressure.
| [reply] |
I think the down votes are because a) syntax checking only through BEGIN, CHECK, INIT doesn't solve the OP's problem and b) because you said you don't know what order BEGIN, etc run in when it's easily discoverable from the docs (never admit weakness ;-).
Though, in any case your post does present a potential "solution". The OP could modifiy the modules such that any initialization code is in an INIT block rather than free of subroutine shackles and so executed at module use-time. Of course, this is assuming that the code really isn't warping the syntax of the language to its own nefarious desires and really isn't setting up structures needed by future BEGIN-time processes.
In some sense, perhaps "free" code in modules should automatically be placed in INIT blocks and the module author, if they really need BEGIN-time processing, should be required to say BEGIN { ... }. I'd wager that that's what many people mean with "free" code anyway.
| [reply]
[d/l] |
| [reply] |
