Conrad Schneiker wrote:
> ... That's why I initially made the following suggestion
> that everyone seems to have overlooked:
> 
> # Maybe a "last resort" "extra cautious" warning level is needed to deal
> # with things such as this, so that people can habitually run with -w
> # without being overwhelmed with false alarms about issues they know about
> 
> # or have otherwise dealt with.
> 
> Just so there is no misunderstanding, this would be *another* (for
> example, -ww or -w2 or -w9) option that gave you the current and
> *unmodified* -w warnings, *plus* things that are known to be *sometimes*
> troublesome for the new non-expert Ruby fans, people who missed their
> morning coffee break, the sleep-deprived, the rushed maintainers of other
> people's code, and so on.
> 

I like this idea, and it reminds me of how PHP handles error reporting:

http://www.php.net/manual/en/function.error-reporting.php

Perhaps a similar (optional) scheme could be used?


Guy N. Hurst

-- 
HurstLinks Web Development    http://www.hurstlinks.com/
Norfolk, VA  23510            (757)623-9688 FAX 623-0433
PHP/MySQL - Ruby/Perl - HTML/Javascript