Re: [PATCH] #!/usr/bin/perl -> #!/usr/bin/env perl

[Eric Wong <e@80x24.org>]

Alyssa Ross <hi@alyssa.is> wrote:
> >>  certs/create-certs.perl       | 2 +-
> >
> > Documentation in corresponding t/*.t files could be better
> > about running that and instead recommend "$^X"
> 
> Makes sense.  This was the one that was giving me problems in the first
> place.
> 
> >>  t/hl_mod.t                    | 2 +-
> >
> > Oops, there probably shouldn't have a shebang there at all
> > since none of the other *.t files have it.  I've also seen
> > "#!perl -w" (no '/' at all) in other projects, but I don't think
> > it's worth the effort unless some external tools/highlighters
> > work better with it. I expect "#!/usr/bin/perl -w" to be most
> > compatible with highlighters and stuff like file(1).
> 
> #!perl has some nice characteristics -- it's understood by the
> interpreter for setting flags, and for -x, but at the same time it's
> clear that a file with #!perl is not supposed to be directly executed.

Agreed.  However, I'm not sure if compatibility with
highlighters would be as good as a full path.

> Assuming you don't want to change to #!perl, do you want a patch to
> recommend running certs/create-certs.perl and remove the shebang from
> t/hl_mod.t?  And should the executable bits still be set on the other
> files?

Just the messages in t/*.t for certs/create-certs.perl is fine.
Thanks.

I don't think the other changes would affect users/testers.
Also, t/hl_mod.t as-is could be a good comparison for syntax
highlighters in the future (and I am leaning towards dropping
"use warnings").

Not sure if there's executable bits worth changing, now; I think
it's a good way to inform users that a given file can be
executed (rather than loaded via `require'); but the '.t' files
might be a special case...