From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] send-email: squelch warning due to comparing undefined $_ to "" Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:37:29 -0800 Message-ID: <7vmypv5v9y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1203486907-12304-1-git-send-email-jaysoffian@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jay Soffian X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 20 19:38:22 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JRtpe-00086b-AH for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 19:38:14 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752362AbYBTShj (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:37:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752373AbYBTShi (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:37:38 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:49276 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752246AbYBTShh (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:37:37 -0500 Received: from .pobox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F00342A5; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:37:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F22F42A2; Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:37:32 -0500 (EST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jay Soffian writes: > The check to see if initial_reply_to is defined was also comparing $_ to > "" for a reason I cannot ascertain (looking at the commit which made the > change didn't provide enlightenment), but if $_ is undefined, perl > generates a warning. > > Signed-off-by: Jay Soffian > --- > Junio, the commit which introduced the change was yours, but I don't > see why you were comparing $_ to "". I think it was meant to check for $initial_reply_to being empty (i.e. not compare $_ but the variable), but even if that is the case I do not think the check would make a difference. So the patch looks good. Thanks.