As David K. suggested here: https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33124#c15
Created attachment 45869 [details] Proposed patch Is there a preferred ordering of the "use" statements at the top?
style-queue ran check-webkit-style on attachment 45869 [details] without any errors.
Comment on attachment 45869 [details] Proposed patch These changes look fine, but I noticed that the script isn't using strict mode and doesn't have warnings enabled: > Index: WebKitTools/Scripts/test-webkitperl - #/usr/bin/perl + #/usr/bin/perl -w > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ > > # Runs unit tests of WebKit Perl code. + use strict; > +use File::Spec; > use FindBin; > use Test::Harness; > use lib $FindBin::Bin; # so this script can be run from any directory. These two changes will require all variables to be declared (using 'my'). Sorry I didn't catch this earlier!
(In reply to comment #3) > (From update of attachment 45869 [details]) > These changes look fine, but I noticed that the script isn't using strict mode > and doesn't have warnings enabled: > ... > These two changes will require all variables to be declared (using 'my'). > Sorry I didn't catch this earlier! No problem -- thanks for noticing it now!
Created attachment 45887 [details] Proposed patch 2
style-queue ran check-webkit-style on attachment 45887 [details] without any errors.
Comment on attachment 45887 [details] Proposed patch 2 > Index: WebKitTools/Scripts/test-webkitperl > =================================================================== > --- WebKitTools/Scripts/test-webkitperl (revision 52795) > +++ WebKitTools/Scripts/test-webkitperl (working copy) > @@ -30,23 +30,20 @@ > > # Runs unit tests of WebKit Perl code. > > +use strict; > +use warnings; Adding "-w" to the "#!/usr/bin/perl" line actually catches slightly more issues than "use warnings" (IIRC), but I don't think it really matters for this script. r=me
Comment on attachment 45887 [details] Proposed patch 2 Clearing flags on attachment: 45887 Committed r52817: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/52817>
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
(In reply to comment #7) Sorry I missed that part of your comment. Is "use warnings" redundant with "-w"? The other Perl scripts seem to have both.
(In reply to comment #10) > Sorry I missed that part of your comment. Is "use warnings" redundant with > "-w"? The other Perl scripts seem to have both. Having both is technically redundant, but doesn't hurt anything. In this specific case, I think "-w" is equivalent to "use warnings", so it doesn't need both. See "man warnings" and "man perllexwarn" for details.
http://build.webkit.org/builders/Leopard%20Intel%20Debug%20%28Tests%29/builds/8891 seems to think this change caused a regression. I don't believe it.
Filed bug 33230 about the failures seen on the bot. I don't think they're related to this change.