I submitted a pull request to update/change efm_perl.pl
( http://goo.gl/oJfqs ).
Andy asked me what kind of justification I could make for it so he could
pass that on to Bram.
This is how I responded, but I'd like other's input as well. Am I out in
left field here? Any additions to what I've got would be nice.
At its core, efm_perl.pl reformats any error/warning messages from 'perl -c
%'. These changes don't improve on that, and I don't really see how that
could change unless perl changes the way it reports errors and warnings.
My changes handle some annoyances I have had with the output and what is
checked. These changes include ignoring the 'compilation aborted' message,
and a way to easily add additional messages to be skipped (like the
DB::single used once warning).
Also, if any of the following modules are installed; circular::require,
indirect, warnings::method or warnings::unused, it is assumed you want to
use them to check your code, and are included in the call to 'perl -c'.
Finally, when checking packages inheriting from a base package in the same
directory structure, and the library hasn't been installed on the system, a
spurious 'could not locate in @inc <https://github.com/inc>' error is
reported. Though, the way I check for this is naive, I'm not really sure
how to improve it.
I, obviously, think this would be a good change to vim. However, I realize
others will have different ideas. Perhaps I need to submit this to vim-perl
community and see what they have to say?