QA (public) » openQA Project (public) » openQA Tests (public)

I tested if use strict; prevents the use of uninitialized values and from my small experiment it does:

no warnings, no strict:

#!/usr/bin/perl

sleep(3);
print $foo if ($foo < 3);

-> no output,

only warnings:

#!/usr/bin/perl

use warnings;
sleep(3);
print $foo if ($foo < 3);

Output after the three seconds sleep have passed:

Use of uninitialized value $foo in numeric lt (<) at strict.pl line 6.
Use of uninitialized value $foo in print at strict.pl line 6.

Only strict:

#!/usr/bin/perl

# use warnings;
use strict;
sleep(3);
print $foo if ($foo < 3);

Output (before executing the sleep):

Global symbol "$foo" requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare "my $foo"?) at strict.pl line 6.                                                                               
Global symbol "$foo" requires explicit package name (did you forget to declare "my $foo"?) at strict.pl line 6.                                                                               
Execution of strict.pl aborted due to compilation errors.

Conclusion:
use strict prevents the case that we want to solve with this ticket.

Next I enabled the check in make perlcritic (--include "strict"), this gives me to following numbers (executed inside os-autoinst-distri-opensuse): 923 modules that fail due to missing use strict; or use warnings; (perlcritic checks for both), 173 modules pass the test.

I don't understand why the check would report that so many modules would miss strict.

git ls-files '*.pm' | xargs grep -L 'use \(strict\|5.018\)'

gives me just a very limited list:

lib/LTP/TestInfo.pm
lib/publiccloud/azure.pm
lib/publiccloud/ec2.pm
lib/publiccloud/instance.pm
lib/publiccloud/provider.pm

so what's going on?

okurz wrote:

I don't understand why the check would report that so many modules would miss strict.

git ls-files '*.pm' | xargs grep -L 'use \(strict\|5.018\)'

gives me just a very limited list:

lib/LTP/TestInfo.pm
lib/publiccloud/azure.pm
lib/publiccloud/ec2.pm
lib/publiccloud/instance.pm
lib/publiccloud/provider.pm

so what's going on?

I used perlcritic --include strict -l to create the list, which also checks for use warnings; - Is there a good reason not to enable "warnings"? If so, I will look into singling out the rule for strict, else I will just update the Makefile to include --inlcude "strict" in make perlcritic

I see. Yes, I think use warnings should also be used in all files except where we use something like use 5.018 or use 5.12 (see https://stackoverflow.com/a/6050356). I don't know what is the best approach. But enabling tests sounds good but only when combined with an actual fix. That however should not be hard with a right combination of "git grep" and "sed" to change existing files.

The mentioned PR adds 'use strict' and 'use warnings' to all test modules and libraries, except for "lib/mail_ltp.pm". This is due to repeated evaluations of said library, which cause "redefined subroutines". Therefore the file is not using warnings and it is excluded from the perlcritic "strict" check.

I came across another issue: Some of the files don't have maintainer or summary information in them. Touching them caused our CI to check for those pieces of information, exposing the lack of them and failing the test.

I created #47012 as a blocker to address that issue.

merged.